Ain't It Cool News (

The Friday Docback Says Goodbye To Old Friends As 'The Angels Take Manhattan'!! READER REACTION To DOCTOR WHO S07E05 Begins With A Spoiler Free Review From Merrick, Newslet Roundup, And More!!





Merrick here...


...with a SPOILER FREE review of The Angels Take Manhattan, the fifth of five new DOCTOR WHO installments airing this Autumn/Fall.  


The next fresh episode - a DOCTOR WHO Christmas Special - will presumably transmit, well, this December.  Almost certainly on Christmas Day (following a pattern established by previous DW ‘Christmas Specials’).  Said Christmas Special is said to re-introduce the lovely and intriguing Jenna-Louise Coleman to the series - as the Doctor’s new companion.  Coleman was first seen this Season/Series via a substantive surprise appearance in S7‘s opener, Asylum of the Daleks.  


There will be a Docback for the Christmas Special this year...probably opening a day or two before the special actually broadcasts.  


Next week, we’ll return to our exploration of ‘Classic’ WHO with a look at the recently restored Vengeance on Varos (C. Baker, Story # 139).  Truth be told, Varos will represent my first Colin Baker story.  I’m carrying many pre-conception into my viewing of Varos, and am very curious to see how this story - and Baker’s Doctor -  will actually shake out.  


That’s next week.  But for now...








Asylum of the Daleks (S07E01) HERE in HD and HERE in standard def.

Dinosaurs on a Spaceship (S07E02) HERE in HD and HERE in standard def.  

A Town Called Mercy (S07E03) - HERE in HD, HERE in standard def! 

The Power of Three (S07E04) - HD / STANDARD.

The Angels Take Manhattan - HD HERE, standard def HERE






In which A Site Called Fred's Ken Plume and I discuss fan/audience expectations of shows (DOCTOR WHO and more) and then unload on shitty Internet etiquett and message board conduct.  More serious than our usual fare, but heartfelt, based on many years in the trenches, and we both stand behind what we say.  

Find it HERE,  while past installments are HERE








20% off all a lot of merchandise, including DOCTOR WHO awesomeness. 


TARDIS beach towels!?!?!?? (WANT!)  This ‘Don’t Blink!’ shirt to commemorate this weekend’s date with the Angels.  So much more...


Enter promo Code FSO12 during checkout!  Offer not valid on previous purchases, exchanges or special offers. Cannot be combined with other BBC America Shop promotion codes.  For, the promo code is FSC12.


Evidently, this sale ends October 1 - so move quickly if interested.  










This is fun and clever, and will totally make sense to you after you watch The Angels Take Manhattan.  


Per Random House's Australian website...


On some days, New York is one of the most beautiful places on Earth.  This was one of the other days…

Melody Malone, owner and sole employee of the Angel Detective Agency, has an unexpected caller. It’s movie star Rock Railton, and he thinks someone is out to kill him. When he mentions the ‘kiss of the Angel’, she takes the case. Angels are Melody’s business…

At the press party for Railton’s latest movie, studio owner Max Kliener invites Melody to the film set of their next blockbuster. He’s obviously spotted her potential, and Melody is flattered when Kliener asks her to become a star. But the cost of fame, she’ll soon discover, is greater than anyone could possibly imagine.

Will Melody be able to escape Kliener’s dastardly plan – before the Angels take Manhattan?

Random House's Australian site already has this eBook available for pre-order HERE, and presumably it will also hit a variety of eBook stores (Apple?  Barnes when it releases October 4!  










Docbacks are regularly visited by participants from across the globe - which is tremendously cool.  Global visitors are cool.  Alas, DOCTOR WHO is shown in different times in different places across the world...  


For example, it transmits in the UK early evening  - which is early afternoon US time.  




This Docback will remain a SPOILER FREE ZONE until DOCTOR WHO’s initial UK transmit (which occurs early afternoon Saturday, US time).  


Once DW transmits in the UK, SPOILERS will be allowed in this forum.  Thus, folks wishing to remain unsoiled by Angels Take Manhattan details until they've seen the episode for themselves may wish to tread very, very carefully if entering this Docback after late morning(ish) North American time.  


Please note the Spoiler Warning Policy posted on the Code of Conduct below.  








The Angels Take Manhattan - SPOILER FREE REVIEW 



Much to my surprise, The Angels Take Manhattan is not a story in which Charlie’s Angels are actually Weeping Angels, in Manhattan. 


Yes, I’m joking about this expectation, although I’d suggest a CHARLIE’S ANGELS reboot featuring Weeping Angels in place of three beautiful women might be considerably more daring and far more interesting than any variation on the CHARLIE’S ANGELS premise we’ve see thus far.  

With this out of the way....


The Angels Take Manhattan is an episode of bold vision and daring conception, forcefully (if not ingeniously) realized by returning director Nick Hurran (S6‘s The God Complex and The Girl Who Waited, and this years’s Asylum of the Daleks).  



TATM shows the Doctor (Matt Smith), Amy (Karen Gillan), Rory (Arthur Darvill) and Melody/River (Alex Kingston) a very, very bad day.  The kind of day only a very twisted and dark-spirited soul could conjure.  Steven Moffat wrote this, and I'm thinking The Moff may need a hug.  Everyone extend a cyber hug to The Moff via the Docbacks below.  But, you know, keep it clean.  


Yet within Angels’ aggressive determination to shove its characters all the way through an emotional shredder, and then kick around the piece of what’s left, there is still beauty...and no small portion of hope.  Longstanding WHO tenets about love and dedication are pointedly re-validated here, and the relationship between a few of the show’s regular characters are more clearly stated and sharply defined than ever before.  More than being about time displacement or creepy alien 'don't blink' statue things, Angels in Manhattan is about love, commitment, and what they ultimately mean when all chips are down. 


Last week’s generally excellent The Power of Three began an emotional arc seen to fruition in Angels.  While Power and Angels are more or less detached narratively, I very much feel the two work in concert together in a number of regards.  As I wrote LAST WEEK, I view Power of Three as something of a pre-emptive wake for Amy and Rory’s highly publicized departure from DOCTOR WHO.  And, of course, it very much cemented an emotional undercurrent/backbone for what happens this weekend.  



Performance are exceptional across the board, with a special emphasis and heartfelt tip-of-the-hat to Matt Smith and Karen Gillan - both of whom skillfully master this episode’s abundant tonal shifts, mining them fully to bring about Angels’ heart-wrenching and haunting power.  


The Angels Take Manhattan is not an easy episode.  When I say that it's not easy, I am referring to its emotional part, at least...but chiefly to the ideas which fuel said emotional content.  When I finished watching my screener Wednesday night, I wasn’t sure how to react emotionally.  My lady asked if I was OK...I suppose I was silent, or something.  In that moment, I wasn’t emotionally moved as much as I was compelled and seduced by some of the concepts which drive this story.  There’s something insidious about them...something a tad more disturbing than I was expecting.  It was not until I was driving my dog to the vet the following morning that Angels’ emotional component caught up with me...and floored me. 




So, be prepared to travel a long arc with this one...your thoughts and feelings about Angels may shift as you move deeper into your processing of the episode.  But do allow room for exploration of this one.  It’s very, very much worth it.  


For its exit of Amy and Rory alone, Angels will undoubtedly be remembered as a hugely meaningful installment in DOCTOR WHO lore.  Does this make it one of the best episodes ever? Hard to be certain at this juncture, but in the here and now, Angels is one helluva ride.  




The Angels Take Manhattan.  9/8C BBC America (19:20 BBC One, 9/8C Space). 







Vengeance on Varos (C. Baker, Story #139)  







Glen Oliver




Google +










[Season / Series Seven Docbacks - MOST RECENT DOCBACK IS HIGHLIGHTED]


The Coming of Season/Series 7

Asylum of the Daleks 

Dinosaurs on a Spaceship

A Town Called Mercy 

The Power of Three 






"The Impossible Astronaut"

"Day of the Moon"

"The Curse of the Black Spot"

"The Doctor's Wife"

"The Rebel Flesh"

"The Almost People"

"A Good Man Goes To War"

"Let's Kill Hitler"

"Night Terrors"


"The Doctor, The Widow and the Wardrobe" (2011 Christmas Special)  





"An Unearthly Child" (Story #1)

"The Daleks" (Story #2)

"The Edge of Destruction" (Story #3)

"Marco Polo" (Story #4)

"The Keys of Marinus(Story #5)

"The Aztecs" (Story #6)

"The Sensorites" (Story #7)

"The Sensorites" (Story #7 - full DVD release) 

"The Reign of Terror" (Story #8)

"Planet of Giants" (Story #9) 

"The Dalek Invasion of Earth" (Story #10)

"The Rescue" (Story #11) 

"The Romans"  (Story #12) 

"The Web Planet" (Story #13) / SHERLOCK - "A Scandal in Belgravia" (Story #4)

"The Crusade" (Story #14) 

"The Space Museum" (Story #15) 

"The Chase" (Story #16) 

"The Time Meddler" (Story #17) 

"Galaxy 4" (Story #18) 

"Mission to the Unkonwn" (Story #19) 

"The Myth Makers" (Story #20) 

"The Gunfighters" (Story #25)

"The Tomb of the Cybermen" (Story #37)

"The Mind Robber" (Story #45)

"The Krotons" (Story #47)

"The Seeds of Death" (Story #48) 

"Spearhead from Space" (Story #51) 

"The Colony in Space" (Story #58) 

"The Daemons" (Story #59) 

"Day of the Daleks" (Story #60) + Preview of the DotD Special Edition

"The Three Doctors" (Story #65) 

"Carnival of Monsters" (Story #66) 

"Death to the Daleks" (Story #72) 

"Invasion of the Dinosaurs" (Story #71) and SHERLOCK: "The Reichenbach Fall" (Story #6) 

"The Android Invasion" (Story #83) and SHERLOCK: "The Hounds of Baskerville" (Story #5) 

"The Face of Evil" (Story #89) 

"The Robots of Death" (Story #90) 

"The Talons of Weng-Chiang" (Story #91)

"The Sun Makers(Story #95)

"The City of Death" (Story #105)

"Nightmare of Eden" (Story #107) 

"Kinda" (Story #118)

"Snakedance" (Story #125) 

"The Five Doctors" (Story #129) 

"The Awakening" (Story #131)

"Frontios(Story #132)

"Resurrection of the Daleks" (Story #134) 

"The Caves of Androzani" (Story #136) 

"Time and the Rani" (Story #144)

"Paradise Towers" (Story #145) + New WHOvian Documentary / Newsbits

"Dragonfire" (Story #147) 

"The Happiness Patrol" (Story #149) 

"The Greatest Show in the Galaxy" (Story #151) 

"Doctor Who: The Movie" (aka TVM) - McGann) 


Merrick's Personal Journey With The Doctor (How Merrick Got Hooked On DOCTOR WHO)

DOCTOR WHO Title Sequences & DW At Comic-Con 2011

"The Crash of the Elysium" (Manchester version - interactive DOCTOR WHO adventure)

Why Eccleston Left, Here Comes Caroline Skinner, And Season/Series Six Part 1 on Blu-Ray And DVD

New Trailer For Season/Series Six Part 2

The Companions of DOCTOR WHO + New Trailer & Artwork For Season/Series 7  






1) a Docback should be about completely open and free discourse regarding all things WHO with, obviously, some variation on subject matter from time to time - the real world intervenes, discussions of other shows are inevitable, etc.)... 

2) matters of SPOILAGE should be handled with thoughtful consideration and sensitivity.  Posts containing SPOILERS should clearly state that a SPOILER exists in its topic/headline and should never state the spoiler itself . "** SPOILER ** Regarding Rory" is OK, for example.  "** SPOILER ** Battle of Zarathustra" is fine as well.  " **SPOILER** Why did everyone die?"  Is NOT good.  
And, above all... 

3) converse, agree, disagree, and question as much as you want - but the freedom to do so is NOT a license to be rude, crass, disrespectful, or uncivilized in any way.  Not remaining courteous and civil, as well as TROLLING or undertaking sensational efforts to ignite controversy, will result in banning.  Lack of courtesy may receive one (1) warning before a ban is instigated.  Obvious Trolling or Spamming will result in summary banning with no warning.  One word posts intended to bump-up any Docback's figures on AICN's "Top Talkbacks" sidebar will be considered actionable Spam - they not only complicate efforts to access Docback from mobile devices, but impede readers' abilities to follow or engage in flowing conversation. 
In short, it's easy.  Be excellent to each other.  Now party on... 
Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Sept. 28, 2012, 6:25 a.m. CST


    by GeptaOO1

    omg i <3 Doctor Who

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 6:54 a.m. CST

    Wonderful pre-emptive strike review

    by Steven

    I've lurked here for years, but never signed up for an account until now. I just had to say what a wonderful spoiler free review this was. It's prepped me for what I know is going to be an emotional gut punch tomorrow night. I've never been more excited and apprehensive for an episode of Dr Who in my life, and I've seen me a lot of Dr Who Love the Docbacks...keep em up.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 7:06 a.m. CST

    Got a lot of faith in this episode eventually attaining classic status.

    by Captain Howdy

    Really looking forward to it.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 7:13 a.m. CST

    Lookin forward to this one

    by HornOrSilk

    Not sure what to expect. I am keeping lower expectations because of the high reviews I've seen so to let it be appreciated as its own and not according to my expectations from reviews. I somewhat hope this will be the end of the Angels for sometime. Not to say they shouldn't be back, but I think they need a rest and something new come up. Angels can and should be back -- but the way I would do it is an odd way -- have them not as the primary focus of a story but instead, in the middle of some story or another suddenly have one (a real one) appear -- to make it a real unexpected danger and horror (the Doctor is being chased by Daleks, and suddenly, an Angel appears... what does he do?). Imagine the Angels taking on Daleks -- or the Doctor having to do a quick truce with someone to deal with an Angel, and once done, suddenly be smacked from behind by the one who he had a truce with. Something along those lines. Use them as unexpected elements in other stories (not too often, mind you, because that would be tiresome too) instead of the primary focus. That is how best to use them next.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 7:17 a.m. CST

    Oh, and as a prelude to next week

    by HornOrSilk

    I think you know Colin's years suffered a great deal from the BBC's lack of interest in Doctor Who. The budget wasn't what it should be. Vengeance on Varos is a very good Colin Baker story. However, imo, the pacing, and some of the sets, are just off -- they don't exactly help with the excellent script. But once you know that and are ready to be underwhelmed in the visuals, and once you know the 6th Doctor was the most "anti-hero" of the Doctors since Hartnell, you will find the story quite interesting and I think relevant. It's a masterful idea for a story -- and would be something which would be seen as a masterpiece if done with the budget of New Who.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 7:33 a.m. CST

    Amy & Rory are leaving ? Where was the SPOILER ALERT !

    by dj_bollocks

    I'm joking... And to continue the chat in last week's thread V'Shael, I certainly wasn't suggesting that the JLC topless pic in the Sun today was anything controversial, but you know how some people in the world get their knickers in a twist about these sort of things... Anyway, you can catch JLC in Room At The Top on BBC Four tonight or on the iPlayer... I'll be checking it out to see what her acting chops are like... *ahem*

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 7:34 a.m. CST

    Longstanding WHO tenants about love and dedication

    by V'Shael

    The word is tenets! I had to read that sentence several times before I understood what you were trying to say...

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 7:34 a.m. CST

    PS... Watching Blink tonight as a prelude...

    by dj_bollocks

    I have a feeling it will be important...

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 7:40 a.m. CST

    Lovely piece - I really like those spoiler - free reviews.

    by V'Shael

    As much as I like some spoilers (vague and general in nature, like, I dunno, telling us what sort of monster will be back next year) as a general rule I don't like episode spoilers. Merricks' write ups are great at capturing the tone and the emotional resonance he feels, without giving anything substantial from the plot away. I'm looking forward to tomorrows episode, as I strongly suspect it will be the best ofthe first five episodes. And while we've been saying goodbyes to the Ponds almost every episode since God Complex, I think this is the one that will sting the most, that will have the most impact on our lonely Timelord, and may change the way we look at River Songs storyline completely.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 7:40 a.m. CST

    Well, well.

    by Fi

    Thank you Merrick, that makes me ridiculously excited. Before all other episodes this season I've seated myself on the sofa, cringing slightly, wondering whether it will deliver, and have finished watching feeling not quite satisfied. This review indicates that the audiences have demanded satisfaction, and it will be granted, finally. Expectations be damned, I'm just looking forward to seeing super acting and some Who to remember.

  • There were notices somewhere (might have been the Radio Times, might have been Doctor Who magazine) to tell readers that they should wait until the credits have rolled. I don't know if there's a coda to the story, or just a new trailer for the Christmas episode, or what. But I was wondering if your screener contained anything like that? Since you didn't have any such reminder in your article, to keep watching after the credits have rolled?

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 7:43 a.m. CST

    Can't wait!!!!

    by billyhitchcock1

    I'm sure I read a huge spoiler on twitter earlier but now I can't remember who it was. Varos is THE best 6th Doctor story. It also contains my biggest behind the sofa moment from my youth. Scared me shitless.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 7:52 a.m. CST

    v'shael - re: after credits tag

    by Merrick

    None on my screener. Doesn't mean something won't be on the broadcast version - but my *understanding* is that the screeners I see are what the network uses to package the broadcast version. So, the omission seems peculiar. Any sense of supposed content?

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 7:52 a.m. CST

    Damn, it's gone soooo fast!

    by Seph_J

    But at least we get to go out on a good one! Exciting times!

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 7:53 a.m. CST

    Vengence on Varos - Colin Baker

    by V'Shael

    I've said in the Docbacks many times before that I love Colin Bakers incarnation. Much more so because of what he's done off screen, granted. But there are some really lovely episodes of his. I think most people agree that the serial before this one, Attack of the Cybermen, was great, and the Two Doctors pairs him brilliantly with Patrick Troughton. (An incredible treat, given how few of the second doctors tapes are still extant.) Vengence on Varos wouldn't be my first choice to introduce someone to Colin Bakers doctor. If you had the time, Merrick, I'd strongly urge you to watch Attack of the Cybermen first, then Vengeance on Varos. VoV takes place directly after AotC ends, and there is a more visible progression of the Doctors nastier side if the two run in sequential viewing.

  • a trailer for the Christmas episode. What I am hoping though, is that it will be the first official trailer for the 50th anniversary. But that's almost impossibly unlikely, I know.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 8:17 a.m. CST

    Post credits...

    by dj_bollocks

    ...It will be the Christmas trailer, bound to be... Although I'm sure that it if it's not a trail for an 8 Doctor reunion story with Omega, Rassilon, The Master, Adric's rotting corpse, and The Loch Ness Monster some people might be disappointed if not apoplectic...

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 8:31 a.m. CST

    A Puzzle for the Docbackers

    by veteran_of_mu

    My favourite childhood terror was a black and white movie I half-caught one Saturday afternoon. I don't remember the movie's name and I know I was driven away from the TV before seeing its ending - which is extremely frustrating at this late date. So I'm hoping one of you can help. I'd be ever so grateful. It was a pre-Sputnik flick about the space race - various test pilots vying to become the first man to reach orbit in a series of ever more powerful rockets. To my Apollo-jaded young eyes it seemed incredibly hokey ... at first. But when one pilot finally orbited, his body irreversibly adapted to outer space. He became rocky all over - perhaps a precursor to Marvel's The Thing or Kubrick's Starchild. The exposition was that science had no idea what would happen if a human body left the protective cocoon of the Van Allen belt ... I recall the wheezing astronaut landing and making his way back to his base, people screaming at his un-filmed face, bullets bouncing off him, his wife running terrified - all POV - and him confronting the scientists who had sent him Where Man Was Not Meant To Go ... Do you know what movie this may have been? It's probably a forgettable D-grade thing but at an impressionable age I couldn't stop thinking about it ... Driving back to the point, you would think that after all these years DW must have run through every possible monster. From Autons to Zygons we have hundreds of different boojums capable of scaring generations of infants into jibbering fits behind the couch. Yet the Moff managed to come up with two new classic monsters in the Angels and Silents. Silents, controlling minds and stealing life force are perhaps a little like Vampires. But Angels are unprecedented so far as I know. They are perhaps a little like something in Lovecraft ... How did the Moff do this? What is it about these two spookies that makes them so effective. And … is the Moff a genius at making monsters or can anyone do it if they try? Can we do it? I have to have a go. And I'll draw on that unknown movie I asked about. 81st century Earth, humanity re-seeded after the solar flares and re-claiming its heritage. Gleaming cities are being excavated from 5000 years of irradiated mudstorm, lost technologies are being rediscovered and experimented with ... The Tardis materialises in a grassy field overlooking one of the city refurbishments. The 9th Doctor and Rose hop out ... ROSE: And what's that supposed to be? Looks like a disused quarry! DOCTOR: ~There you are. See? The greatest resurgence of human civilisation since the Renaissance and all you can think about is some banal bit of 20th century TV tat. You'll be quoting Eastenders next.~ ROSE: What's wrong with Eastenders? Oh I know it's not boxes hurtling about the galaxy but really there's a lot you can learn from that show. My Mum says - DOCTOR: Your Mum says. You Mum says! Honestly Rose if you're going to get anything out of expanding your horizons you're going to have to leave your Mum at home. ROSE: I did leave her at home. And I miss her to bits. You can take a girl out of the 21st century, you know, but you can't - DOCTOR: [THROWS HIMSELF TO THE GROUND. PUTS SONIC TO THE GROUND AND EAR TO SONIC] Yes, yes, all right, I can't. But do go easy, now, won't you? Anyway we're ignoring the most important thing about yon disused quarry up ahead. ROSE: And what's that? DOCTOR: It's not disused. Run! THE DOCTOR AND ROSE FLEE AS AN IMMENSE METAL ANT SPARKING AND SPUTTERING REARS UP OUT OF THE GROUND AND BEARS DOWN ON THEM ... [Okay, I admit I didn't really want giant metal ants as my monster. They just kind of threw themselves in. I will do away with them in the next installment, promise ...]

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 8:35 a.m. CST

    caractacuspotts I'm not sure

    by HornOrSilk

    Some of it sounds like The Quatermass Experiment.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 8:37 a.m. CST

    V'Shael...I agree

    by Sequitur

    I truly enjoyed Colin Baker's Doctor. I think history has given it a bad reputation, but I believe he never got the time to fully explore his fascinating take on the persona he was developing. Merrick, you should really watch Attack of the Cyberman first.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 8:43 a.m. CST

    Great Work, Merrick


    One of your best Nu-Who reviews to date, in my opinion. I'm very interested in this one and I'm sure I'll have plenty to say after it airs!

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 8:48 a.m. CST

    @horn - nope.

    by veteran_of_mu

    Nice try, sorry, definitely not. I chiefly remember a deathless series of attempts with file footage of early rockets, each failing to reach orbit ...

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 9:01 a.m. CST

    Colin Baker and Nicola Bryant

    by Kathryn Gail

    did an amazing job of making the 6th Doctor and Peri as engaging as possible while under orders to be extremely annoying and dress in terrible holiday-gift outfits from relatives. At least Nicola doesn't have to be sociopathic (and gets to deploy a couple bonus assets--perhaps further downplaying her acting skill, but still well enough received to detract from other impediments), but poor Colin really can't catch a break with a character written/directed as sneeringly paranoid (can he please get a brilliantly constructed do-over for the 50th? he really deserves it!). I think the 6th Doctor stories would be fine dropped into any other era. They just take a little mental editing. Peri using her competent, My Stepdad's An Archaeologist voice now and then, the Doctor calming it down and getting back to the wry banter and being really genuinely interested in everything.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 9:01 a.m. CST

    caractacuspotts RE: Old sci-fi.

    by Captain Howdy

    Might be 'First Man Into Space'.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 9:19 a.m. CST

    The more I think about it... Speculative Spoilage inside

    by dj_bollocks

    I think this is where we see The Pond's end up bringing up Melody/River in New York.... I of course could be completely wrong but it just feels like it points to this... There's enough unanswered questions about the baby and the regenerating girl from The Impossible Astronaut & The Day Of The Moon... And this would not only fit the holes, but also be a fantastic conceit where River not only knew The Doctor's past but she knew Amy & Rory's past and couldn't say anything short of changing her (and maybe many others) future. It's really not a timey wimey stretch - but I'm fascinated if they connect Amy going back in time to the cracks in time as how could she be born in the 80s/90s and be a child and yet be an adult earlier in the 20th Century (I'm sure it will be a perfectly plausible explanation). It appears an almost perfect conceit, a sort of Quantum Leap style beginning and end of a piece of string... I'd love it if something like this has been The Moff's plan all along for the Ponds...

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 9:23 a.m. CST

    @patrickstewartsaweverything There would be nothing stopping....

    by dj_bollocks

    Colin Baker's Doctor being written differently as a result of his "forced" regeneration... Some sort of Time Lord psychosis, even bi-polar with The Valeyard having affected his mind in some way after the battle in the Matrix (or whatever it is qv Deadly Assassin and the end of Trial Of A Time Lord). Anything is possible...

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 9:23 a.m. CST

    Two points in space and time, that should never have touched...

    by V'Shael

    That could be said about many of the characters, not just the edges of the cracks.

  • Have you seen the fan-edit, which replaces Colin Bakers outfit with the all-blue outfit he uses on the covers of some of the audio adventures? You can see it here :

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 9:30 a.m. CST

    What comes AFTER the credits? This, perhaps.

    by V'Shael

    The BBC have revealed today that a special tribute 12 minute feature entitled 'The Last Day Of The Ponds' will be released straight after this weekends mid-series finale The Angels Take Manhattan. BBC Press Office: The Last Days of the Ponds is a touching, 12 minute video that features Matt Smith, Karen Gillan, Arthur Darvill, head writer and Executive Producer Steven Moffat and Executive Producer Carol Skinner. Poignant and insightful it tells their story, from the very start to the teary goodbyes. With exclusive backstage material from their early days together right up to behind-the-scenes footage of their final shots, The Last Days of the Ponds gives you unprecedented access to an era of Doctor Who, but more than this, it reveals how the people involved feel about their characters and their friends, their time on the show, what they’ll miss and remember and how Amy and Rory’s swansong moved them all. Karen, Arthur and Matt recall meeting each other for the first time and share anecdotes about their friendship. What did they think of each other at first and what did Arthur consider to be a nightmare? Which days does Karen call the craziest of all, and how was Matt feeling when it came to shooting the Ponds’ departure? Make sure you stay tuned after the credits this weekend!

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 9:50 a.m. CST

    @Gamma-Ray Joe - THAT'S IT!!!

    by veteran_of_mu And there's a DW tie-in - Roger Delgado as the Mexican Consul! THANK YOU!

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 10 a.m. CST

    Watching the end now I can see why it shocked me as a child.

    by veteran_of_mu

    Truely gruesome stuff considering the era. The file footage is better than any special FX could have been. Really surprising how well it works - it could easily have made a DW episode. Substitute Doctor Von Essen for a madman with a box ...

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 10 a.m. CST

    I'd agree, watch Attack of the Cybermen first...

    by Disgruntled_Chinaman

    Peri's tits are magnificent in this one... And you find out some closure from Revelation of the Daleks as well.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 10:05 a.m. CST

    Caractacuspotts - glad to help, sir.

    by Captain Howdy

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 10:07 a.m. CST

    Sixth Doctor's alternate costume?

    by Disgruntled_Chinaman

    Apparently Colin wanted this darker motif

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 10:08 a.m. CST

    Speculative Spoilers!!

    by billyhitchcock1 This has me almost crying already! If someone has to die i think i'd almost prefer it to be amy rather than rory.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 10:41 a.m. CST

    Preview for the episode?

    by V'Shael

    Apparently this clip has only been available since yesterday... I hadn't seen it.

  • The Weeping Angels are statues. The Melkur are statues. Coincidence or not? The Master's TARDIS once took the shape of a Melkur. Will we find out the Master's TARDIS has taken the shape of a Weeping Angel? And, since the image of an Angel IS an Angel, did the Master make a mistake with this disguise for his TARDIS? Will we find out that it's actually the Master's TARDIS, disguised as a Weeping Angel, that's sending people back in time? And that the Weeping Angels are interested in Rory because Rory's the Master, and it's his TARDIS that has an interest in him? Do we find out that that wasn't actually part Time Lord DNA that Melody Pond had, but was actually part TARDIS DNA? Will we find out that River actually regenerates and becomes a TARDIS? More specifically, she becomes the Master's TARDIS and we find out she's two-timing the Doctor? Probably not, but it's fun extending the HAT into new territories. And, of course, a ceremonial tipping of the HAT to Caractuspotts for coming up with the Rory/Master HAT in the first place.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 11:10 a.m. CST

    Looking forward to this episode

    by DoctorTom

    we'll see if Rory's 1990 badge bothers getting an explanation in this. I suspect not, but at this point it probably doesn't matter. If it's not explained here, somebody will probably use it at some point in a novel or comic with an explanation. The show though will, quite rightly, be more focused on the emotional impact of the Ponds leaving rather than tying up what seem to bit little plot points, The one thing I actually regret is that we didn't get any stories except for the small bit in The Big Bang with Amy's dad Augustus. He seemed like he'd have been a fun character to have had reappear in the show.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 11:13 a.m. CST

    And while we're at it... Speculative Spoilers...

    by dj_bollocks

    The New York House... Could it be the Asylum in The Day Of The Moon ? I think it might be you know... Tonight is definitely a Blink, Impossible Astronaut, Day Of The Moon night... I'll be such a smug git if I'm right... We'll never talk of this again if I'm wrong...

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 11:20 a.m. CST

    Fun with Angels

    by DoctorTom

    Since the image of an Angel IS an Angel.... ...little kids drawing stick figure Angels end up giving viewers uncomfortable flashbacks to Fear Her.... ...A woman reports her husband missing to the police. The last she saw there had been a statue right behind him, looking like it's menacing him. She gives a description, and the police sketch artist makes a drawing of it... ...after having been exposed to television in the mid-late 1980's (specifically Max Headroom), late at night in a television studio we have Weeping Angels filming themselves, and splicing frames of themselves into blipverts which will imprint their images directly into the minds of viewers...

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 11:23 a.m. CST

    dj bollocks

    by DoctorTom

    the New York House shouldn't be the Asylum in Day of the Moon - the Asylum was in Florida, if I recall correctly. That doesn't mean the same location isn't used for it in actual filming, but I don't think it's supposed to be the same place in the Who universe.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 11:30 a.m. CST

    A ridiculous not in anyway serious FAT....

    by dj_bollocks

    Full Arsed Theory... Oswin is in fact Dalek Sec cos they were in Manhattan too... I'm disgusted in myself at even joking about it... I am of course fully tongue in cheek here...

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 11:41 a.m. CST

    dj_bollocks - not bad, but that's not the right Dalek

    by DoctorTom

    She wouldn't be Dalek Sec - she'd be Dalek Caan. Caan was in Manhattan too, and went insane after flying into the Time War, so there's a perfectly good reason for him to be in a Dalek Asylum. leaked dialog from an upcoming episode: CLARA/OSWIN: Doctor, does this Mark III Travel Machine casing make my butt look big?

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 11:45 a.m. CST

    @doctortom - yes that's the one...

    by dj_bollocks

    To be honest it's a pair of episodes I've never watched again they were THAT bad... Hideous story... I'd probably rather watch Love & Monsters than that crock... at least it would be shorter....

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 11:54 a.m. CST

    dj bollocks

    by DoctorTom

    I actually like Love & Monsters. Fear Her, though, is a different story. I'd agree though that for the most part the Dalek 2 parter from Season 3 isn't that good. I'm amused by the two Daleks conspiring and trying to whisper to each other, though...

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 12:01 p.m. CST

    Helen Raynor - the modern day Pip & Jane Baker

    by dj_bollocks

    I see she script edited, Moff's "Silence in the Library"/"Forest of the Dead" no wonder she's not on his team...

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 12:15 p.m. CST

    to be fair though, dj_bollocks

    by DoctorTom

    I enjoyed the Sontaran 2 parter she did. She seemed to have improved a lot from her first to her second Doctor Who story.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 12:20 p.m. CST


    by Michael_Jacksons_Ghost

    If I had known that you would be raiding Harry's basement, I would of had you steal me the Map of the Universe from Time Bandits. Cool video, you and Ken should do video versions of WHOTININNIES. I would watch.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 12:26 p.m. CST

    *Very* excited for this one...

    by Mister Vertue

    I have a feeling Glen will want to jump in with a comment or two after the rest of you have seen it too.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 12:31 p.m. CST

    MOV - Same here.

    by Michael_Jacksons_Ghost

    I have a feeling that Brian Williams (if alive) will be pissed about whatever happens to Rory/Amy.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 12:36 p.m. CST

    Merrick - will there be new Whotininnies Saturday night?

    by DoctorTom

    I really liked how you were able to have the last two up after the show broadcast in the US, and could have a discussion with Ken that included spoilers on the episode. I have a feeling that this episode deserves a Whotininnies.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 12:51 p.m. CST

    doctortom - yes, a Whotinninies episode is needed for this

    by Mister Vertue

    It would be a crime not to do so. And an even greater crime to omit the fart machine Glen. We all know Ken loves it really.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 12:52 p.m. CST

    Turn your car into a TARDIS

    by DoctorTom

    or a Dalek

  • MOV - the fart machine is not going anywhere, especially considering that I just bought fresh batteries for it. That fart machine was a gift from my lady on our first Christmas together. That's how I knew she truly loved me. WHO KNEW it could become the stuff of legend?! And, yeah, I do believe I'll throw in few more thoughts on Angels once the episode has transmitted. Much has to remain unspoken at the moment. doctortom - a new WHOTINNIES was recorded early this morning (Friday) and will be online tomorrow (Saturday) night shortly after BBCA's broadcast of Angels in Manhattan. michael_jacksons_ghost - I tried repeatedly to swipe that God map. I could never detach it from its mounting. Given that Ken refuses to activate his Skype camera during a WHOTININNIES recording, I'm not sure a video version would/could/should come together. I'm pretty sure he doesn't turn the camera on because he's sitting in front of his computer wearing nothing but underwear..if that. christian_bale_trashed_my_lights - thanks you for the kind words. Very much appreciated! v'shael/ sequitur - thanks for the C. Baker Cybermen recommendation. I'll see if I can find it quickly. v'shael, thanks for the kind words re: the write-ups. Communicating w/o spoiling...I find an incredibly challenging dance. Most appreciated!

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 1:45 p.m. CST

    Woo hoo!

    by DoctorTom

    Thanks for the info, Merrick! I think I'd agree keeping Whotininnies as audio-only, unless you two do a special edition at a convention or a Doctor Who showing that you end up recording. I have the feeling that if you did it with normal podcasts, it would soon end up the camera being focused purely on a Dalek toy or something like that.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 1:58 p.m. CST

    Looper and multi-Doctor stories

    by HornOrSilk

    While I don't think Looper, as a whole, is as good as critics are making it out to be, nonetheless I think the way it deals with multiple persons from different times zones in the same instant would work as a way to explain multi-Doctor stories. Time is in flux in the moment they are together so that the future Doctor has no memories until after the event itself happened, then he remembers the past because it becomes solidified.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 2:48 p.m. CST

    I predict it will be as good as the last 4 episodes :(

    by ZTP Dude

    I don't expect the quality to suddenly improve.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 3:11 p.m. CST

    Whotininnies - Glen

    by Ken Plume

    At least I'm wearing pants, nature boy.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 3:13 p.m. CST

    Whotininnies Follow Up

    by Ken Plume

    Owing to early morning exhaustion, I'm not sure Glen and I properly got a handle on the episode. I believe there's much more to be debated. Sans fart machine.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 3:15 p.m. CST


    by Michael_Jacksons_Ghost

    You are based in Atlanta, correct? If so, are you attending the Who convention that will be in Orlando late November?

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 4:21 p.m. CST


    by Merrick

    >>>Owing to early morning exhaustion, I'm not sure Glen and I properly got a handle on the episode. I believe there's much more to be debated.<<< The show felt fine to me. Admittedly, we might've focused on Angels a little more consistently...but were ADD as hell instead..but that's nothing new for WHOTININNIES...or for either of us singularly or That fart machine pulls you up. It completes you. As the rather horrible Clayton Williams once said, "Just relax and enjoy it."

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 4:44 p.m. CST


    by Ken Plume


  • Sept. 28, 2012, 5:14 p.m. CST

    goose bumps

    by Matthew

    will have my answer after the show airs but wondering how the Ponds leaving will stack up against others leaving the show. Rose's exit was very sad, and Donna Noble's was really sad too, The 10th doctor's regeneration was so sad as well. Whats wrong with me that I look forward to being sad and possible moved to tears. Those are off the top of my head the three make you want to cry 2005- area Who moments, the one with Rose's dad is very sad too. Was sad when 9 regenerated but wasn't as invested in the show because I started watching by series 3 I think, but watching The Ponds now for over two years now...ready for some feels

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 6:41 p.m. CST

    Nano-HAT. The Ponds leave when ...

    by veteran_of_mu

    Amy has to get hit by a car to save the timeline. Rory won't travel with the Doc any more because, ~I could have saved her. Do you know what you just did?~ River says, ~He knows, Rory. He knows.~

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 7:06 p.m. CST

    I'm hoping

    by maelstrom_ZERO

    that the episode will be good. Thus far, the season has been pretty much a let down. Of course there are moments of isolated brilliance, but aside from AotD, everything's felt a bit off. Here's hoping TATM will blow my mind into tiny little pieces with the force of its sheer awesomeness. Figuratively speaking, of course.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 7:47 p.m. CST

    Sorry, New York 1938 always makes me think of Edith Keeler

    by veteran_of_mu


  • Sept. 28, 2012, 8:54 p.m. CST

    I hope there'll be a "the doctor has no jacket" moment for Amy

    by tangcameo

    I still wonder about those framed photos on the dresser at the orphanage.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 9:16 p.m. CST

    Glen! How much do you want for the Tardis?

    by tangcameo

  • In my neck of the woods, where you could go home from school for lunch, one of the local tv channels would play The Flintstones for the first half hour of the noon hour before the noon news. The World's Fair episode, where Fred and Barney and Wilma and Betty step into a time machine that's operated like a slot machine, and they go to the Coliseum in Rome, join Columbus on his boat, then go to a Jetson-like future (where are those meals in a pill?!). THAT was my first exposure to time travel. Well that and Max The 2000 Year Old Mouse.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 9:27 p.m. CST

    @merrick: Here's a link to watch "Attack of the Cybermen", and...

    by obijuanmartinez

    There are a number of other compelling facets to this adventure, not least of which being the fact this story features Maurice Colbourne's fantastic Lytton (the mercenary you were exposed to working for the Daleks in the Peter Davison serial "Resurrection of the Daleks"...) This story also serves to bolster events from the Hartnell serial "The Tenth Planet" (as this story takes place in 1986 / last pass of Halley's Comet, and deals w/ the Cybermen plotting to use a stolen time vessel to avert the destruction of their original home of Mondas, which had been Earth's twin planet in Who mythology...), as well as the Troughton serial you previously covered "Tomb of the Cybermen", because it too takes place on the Cyber-world of Telos (and we do again see the famous tombs of the Cybermen, as well as the assumed-dead Cyber-Controller) The story also features (I think) the only time you see the Doc's TARDIS change shape (he temporarily fixes the Chameleon Circuit), Davros out his make-up (Terry Molloy, playing a cop who infiltrates Lytton's gang of thieves), and the fabulous bit-characters Bates & Stratton (the 2 partially cyber-converted, surviving human pilots of the Cybermen's stolen time-ship) This story also might be one of the few C. Baker ones where they had him showing some real depth of character...

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 9:40 p.m. CST

    TARDIS for sale... Soon.

    by Perigee

    I'm not sure if I'm the only prop maniac on this board, but I just received news from QMX (The 3,000 Dollar Screwdriver guys) that they are working on a 20-inch TARDIS replica. The price? Unknown. They swing between incredibly affordable and WTF-Are-You-Kidding? Time will tell. In the meanwhile, have a look and bookmark if you choose.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 9:55 p.m. CST

    Have they said when TATM is set? Because... *POSSIBLE SPOILER-ISH*

    by tangcameo

    If they didn't, there is a clue in one of the promo photos (not shown above but on other sites that shall remain nameless).

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 10:11 p.m. CST

    dj_bollocks, v'shael

    by Kathryn Gail

    Yeah it really wouldn't be a canonical distortion at all to give 6 a bit of a psychological recalibration (and for all I know they've done it on audio). The blue-ified fan-edit suit isn't quite as blue-ified as the audio covers, but a definite improvement.

  • Sept. 28, 2012, 10:18 p.m. CST

    @caractacuspotts in the authentic 1930s New York

    by Kathryn Gail

    you'd be more likely to get Ruby than Edith-- --although if you've seen Joan Collins dance in her early films, her musical theater skills aren't too shabby, either. . .

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 5:41 a.m. CST

    perigee - Re: Tardis for sale... Soon.

    by Mister Vertue

    I'll tell you now for a fact that it'll be in the 'WTF-Are-You-Kidding?' category, but *so* worth it.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 6:41 a.m. CST

    Rory action figure - it finally happened!

    by Mister Vertue But does it really look like him? And what does Arthur make of it? Hmmmm...

  • The angels touch Rory and turn him into an action figure which barely looks like him. Action figures are statues, too.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 7:04 a.m. CST

    And so at the end we have

    by HornOrSilk

    Auton-angel Rory!

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 8:12 a.m. CST

    Look at the action figure's index fingers!

    by veteran_of_mu

    Rory doesn't become an angel. He becomes a silent!

  • the Master!

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 8:38 a.m. CST

    I also like @merrick's point RE: "Day of the Daleks: The Fancy Edition"...

    by obijuanmartinez that you don't get into any pissing contests over canon vs. non (i.e. - "Greedo didn't shoot first"). Day of the Daleks was always a great story, but the fact that the original Dalek voices for this serial were just god-awful (being 4+ years since the last proper Troughton Dalek episode) meant that the folks restoring, adding & bolstering did so very tastefully, and therefore couldn't really rumple the fans' feathers all that much-like...

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 9:13 a.m. CST

    An image of an action figure IS an action figure!

    by Perigee

    Print it out, cut it out and play - heck, with a little photoshop skill, you can rehead him. Or just buy him for the pleasure of having him say ~I'm Plastic..~ over and over again.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 9:49 a.m. CST

    obijuanmartinez Lucas could learn from that

    by HornOrSilk

    All the Star Wars fanboys would not be upset with his newer and newer editions if he included a perfectly cleaned up and polished version of the original with the special edition.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 10:10 a.m. CST

    Amy And Rory

    by Real Deal

    I have to say they are my favorite companions in recent memory ( May be of all time however there is Romana for instance who's acting with Tom Baker was the best ). So I'm bracing myself for tonight. I wish they didn't have to go but I don't see any other way to resolve their Real life / Doctor life dilemma. So even if they lived they'd have to go.I'm wondering if this will be as jarring as Adric. Maybe more since you can't help but love the story ( with the season arc with Amy and the girl who waited ). With this doctor Rory and Amy have always been there. Properly braced.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 10:10 a.m. CST

    @hornorsilk - You know what though?

    by V'Shael

    A perfectly cleaned up and polished version of the original, has been done. Just not by Lucas. Have a read about this (assuming you don't know about it already) version, called the Adywan fan-edit. It's so much more than just a fan-edit. HE's redone special effects, fixed continuity problems in shots, fixed mistakes introduced by the special editions (like the color of Lukes light saber). It is in my opinion anyway, the definitive version of the Star Wars movie.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 11 a.m. CST


    by Michael_Jacksons_Ghost

    About the fanedit, another great thing about it is......Chewie gets a medal!!

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 11:28 a.m. CST

    hard to believe the 5 weeks of Who is already over!

    by Rebel Scumb

    To wax about time a bit in a time travel related tv show talkback, I'm continually amazed how my perception of time continues to speed up the older I get weeks feel like days now, and months feel like weeks. Very bizarre. Feels like at most 3 days ago we were all discussing Asylum of the Daleks, and Angels take Manhatten was some distant point in the future.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 12:15 p.m. CST

    And you know what else is scary, rebel scumb?


    Before you know it, you'll be back here saying "I can't believe the Doctor Who Christmas Special is tomorrow, guys! It only seems like yesterday when I was talking about Angels Take Manhattan"....

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 12:19 p.m. CST

    I can't believe we are about to see the 12th Doctor's first episode

    by Sequitur

    It seems like yesterday we were discussing Rory's badge year in The Eleventh Hour.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 12:23 p.m. CST


    by Ken Plume

    The Angels reveal a new power, turning Amy and Rory into ducks - Mr. & Mrs. Duck Pond. Now sit back, relax, and prepare to go "Yowzah".

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 12:28 p.m. CST

    1 hour to go! Nervous :-)

    by billyhitchcock1

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 12:43 p.m. CST

    How to spend the next 40 minutes...

    by V'Shael

    I've got a chateaubriand on the cooker, a bottle of wine open, and I'm refusing to put on WipeOut as background viewing. Not even if Amanda Byram gets her baps out. Oh hurry up and broadcast the episode already....

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 12:46 p.m. CST


    by billyhitchcock1

    i love a nice bit of wipeout beforehand :-) dw snacks for me is pizza and water.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 1:17 p.m. CST



    Seriously; who watches this Whiteout crap other than DW fans waiting for their weekly episode?

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 1:17 p.m. CST

    my guess before it starts...

    by chronicallydepressedlemming

    Amy will get turned into a statue, and Rory can't bare to be without her so willingly turns himself into one to stay with her. Doctor places them somewhere tasteful/sombre. YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST! ;-)

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 1:17 p.m. CST

    Toblerone, check. Cut-out Weeping Angel mask...

    by Seph_J

    ..check. HERE we GO!!!!!!!

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 1:20 p.m. CST

    let's do this..

    by speckled_hen_drinker

    it is..... on!

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 1:23 p.m. CST

    And so it begins...

    by LarkStew

    ...bring it on...

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 1:28 p.m. CST

    i've been there!

    by speckled_hen_drinker

    that exact spot!

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 1:47 p.m. CST

    Wait. So they reveal Rory is -- HER?

    by HornOrSilk


  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:05 p.m. CST


    by LarkStew

    That wasn't what I expected...

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:06 p.m. CST

    That was gorgeous, shocking, and wonderful.

    by Seph_J

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:07 p.m. CST


    by billyhitchcock1

    so they lived in hotel for like 50/60 years? thats gotta be a spin off surely :-)

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:08 p.m. CST


    by speckled_hen_drinker


  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:09 p.m. CST

    Moffett Was Right

    by robg113

    It hasnt been since the finale of LOST that Ive cried as much as I just did...The Ponds are gone. And It wasa fitting end to these companions.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:09 p.m. CST

    A strong finish

    by donkey_lasher

    But too brief. Splitting Doctor Who is clearly for those in the US, BBC sell outs.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:10 p.m. CST


    by billyhitchcock1

    you're not wrong. it infuriates me no end.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:11 p.m. CST

    Glad to see the back of the Ponds.

    by buggerbugger

    Well, the two who've gone, anyway. When do we get rid of their kid for good?

  • I expect a lot of people will like it though. It just wasn't for me.

  • It literally showed just 3 tiny clips, showing Matt Smith's face, Richard E. Grants face, and the new companion. That was it.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:14 p.m. CST


    by billyhitchcock1

    agreed on river. she's never seemed authentic to me due to the overacting of alex kingston. will miss amy and rory though.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:15 p.m. CST

    donkey_lasher I don't think it is for the US

    by HornOrSilk

    Seriously, the US crowd would like it all at once, too. Indeed, it hurts the US more than helps, imo.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:16 p.m. CST


    by Andy

    Not bad, not great. I hope that is the last we see of the angels for a good while.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:17 p.m. CST

    Gonna buck the trend here, but my over-riding feeling is one of

    by BiggusDickus

    'I've seen this'. Which, in a story about time paradoxes, is probably about right. Not quite the calibre of Pond-finale I was expecting, but serviceable I guess... But please Mr. Moffat- no more River Song or Weeping Angels again, eh? Diminishing returns and all that...

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:18 p.m. CST

    the123 I hope so too

    by HornOrSilk

    And I hope the next time it is not as the main villain but as a surprise 2 mins of "run, I will tell you later" moment

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:19 p.m. CST

    I want more River Song

    by HornOrSilk

    However, I think River can be done in other ways. There is more to her -- if done right.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:26 p.m. CST

    i really really hope

    by jon pertwee

    thats the last time we see the weeping angels.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:26 p.m. CST


    by LarkStew

    Started off with promise, got a bit bogged down in the middle. And then not one but TWO histrionic goodbyes for the Ponds. So in the end it was disappointing for me. Seems like every episode had to have them stuck in some perilous situation with one of them facing certain death and them declaring their undying love for each other for ten minutes. I wish Doctor Who could get back to good solid stories, comprehensively told and without endless melodrama. Fingers crossed!

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:26 p.m. CST


    by Andy

    Dow me river has been most interesting when she has known what will happen. In tonight's show she actually didn't seem to have much to do. More a case of script than Alex Kingstons ability, I think.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:28 p.m. CST

    My only real complaint...

    by CHRISTIAN_BALE_TRASHED_MY_LIGHTS that it could have done with another ten minutes or so. The last few scenes seemed quite rushed in my opinion. Still, it was a fitting final and it's going to be odd seeing The Doctor without the Ponds. I shall miss Rory. :(

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:34 p.m. CST

    it would be really nice

    by jon pertwee

    if the rest of this season keep them away from earth - past, present or future. though i'm curious as to how someone from what looks like the 30s in the xmas trailer, handles the tardis, time travel and so forth. or maybe she's already from the future, looking for the doctor? and will the xmas episode give us a bitter, lonely doctor?

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:37 p.m. CST


    by billyhitchcock1

    so JLC in period costume in the xmas teaser! her story is going to be all kinds of cool :-)

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:42 p.m. CST


    by Rakesh Patel

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:43 p.m. CST

    Wow, three *SPOILERS* in one episode?!?

    by SgtHowie

    That spoiler is DEATHS; is that a record for Rory? He always died a lot but three times, that's quite a feat! :-) A decent enough episode overall IMO. Must admit I don't recall a time in recent years when there has been a run of five episodes - actually six including last Christmas - without a real standout belter among them. Beautiful moment to end on though; little Amelia hearing the Tardis return. And that scene was there in The Eleventh Hour all along of course but now it has a different meaning. I wonder if the Doctor put on a ripped blue shirt for that final visit?

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:43 p.m. CST

    Disappointing end. But then it's been a bad series anyway.

    by scriptgirl_nipples

    The positive?.. Finally shot of Amy & Rory. Thir characters had run it's course. Now please finally get rid of River.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:44 p.m. CST

    rorys dad is going to be waiting a long time.

    by Rakesh Patel

    great episode. very sad. feel rather shitty actually. dammit.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 2:51 p.m. CST


    by Timmid

    The angels were certainly used a lot better in this ep. But the whole thing was just a bit underwhelming for me.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 3 p.m. CST

    Rorys Dad

    by donkey_lasher

    Oh shit. Poor fella :(

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 3:07 p.m. CST

    I was never a huge fan of the angels

    by popboy

    episode was good. amy pond never really matured as a character though and we never really did find out why moffat wrote her as this really clever clogs character at the start of season 5. and then for the next two season turned her into this twitchy and slightly moody person. her arch seemed to suggest that there was more to her than meets the eye. and now she is gone. Amy and rory's daughter is river song. you have just seen your parents die, some room for emotiional depth. er, no. roll end credits... dr was grief stricken but that end kind of killed things.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 3:12 p.m. CST

    Doctor Who?

    by DirtyWookie

    Doctor Who?

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 3:24 p.m. CST

    Enjoyed it, but a very strange ending *spoilers*

    by Captain Howdy

    If the manuscript for the book managed to get to Amy, and neither she nor Rory were trapped in the Angel's hotel, why couldn't the Doctor simply head back in time, meet up with them anywhere other than New York, and just pick them up in the TARDIS? River must clearly have interacted with Amy/Rory after the events of today's episode, (otherwise the book would never have had its Afterword), so what's stopping the Doctor from going to Boston in 1934 and inviting them to join him? That aside, it was an enjoyable episode. Probably need to watch it again before passing final judgement.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 3:29 p.m. CST

    @Gamma-ray_joe : Oh don't pull on that plot thread...

    by V'Shael

    the story barely hangs together as it is. One critical look at the plot, and the whole thing will collapse.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 3:39 p.m. CST


    by paineywoo

    That was sad. How they somehow managed to make a terribly mediocre and dull three episodes before rebooting the show at Christmas... I loved AotD and DOAS - then the following 3 episodes were simply boring. The great energy, photography and direction of those first two episodes seemed to have been zapped back in time by the Angels - leaving slap bang in the dodgy RTD era. I kind of sensed something was up when I saw the amateurish reworking of the title sequence - obviously manipulated in After Effects to save money. ...and this episode? Chock full of plot holes (read the book and find a way out of it, like usual...can't go back to 1938? Go to 1939 and pick them up...use a Time manipulator like River and pick them up...Rory's Dad? "Hello, we just met you and now your son is dead"...Christ, even Amy's forgotten parents?). All I can hope is the Christmas reboot starts things afresh and we can look forward to quality - not half arsed - Who again. Sorry - let me rephrase that: The Christmas reboot starts things afresh and we GET quality - not half arsed - Who again. (There. You READ IT - so now it MUST happen...). Rubbish.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 3:52 p.m. CST



    Like most stories lately: great concepts-a bit saggy round the middle and a rushed ending. Think it was a bit mean spirited to have the scenes with Brian last week only to have a situation where he will never see his son again the following week. The ending too just felt off, the Doc & River really didnt seem to be THAT bothered with what just occurred-the fact that he has has just gone and fucked up yet more lives should have be played more than the 'oh well' look he seemed to have sitting on the stairs. With what has happened to most 'Nu-Who companions' the Doc seems to be more like some kind of angel of death-a selfish alien who picks up human companions, uses them until their luck runs out and moves on to the next victim! What of River? Wasn't clear to me if this meant too that she will never see her parents again-where were the tears? Regret? Contemplation? All the 'don't travel alone' guff was lazy too-if anything, the next story should be the doc contemplating NEVER to take companions again with his history!! An episode examining this would be more interesting than a most of what we have been given lately. Love to hear others peoples thoughts.....

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 4:05 p.m. CST


    by cosmic_dolphin

    That didn't really make sense did it ? What stopping them getting on a plane /train/boat and meeting the Doctor somewhere else. What's stopping River using her Vortex manipulator to go get them. Why would they be buried in that particular cemetery when they could have gone anywhere, back home to England or whatever. Why didn't I cry..not even a little bit....I think I was just glad to see the the back of them, with their over the top, totally overdone 'love' for each other that always seems to save the day. Plus, where were all the answers to the many unanswered questions ? The ducks, the cracks, the photo's in the orphanage, the dying over & over. I found the whole thing quite annoying, there's so many threads left dangling that'll probably never be mentioned again. It was mediocre at best.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 4:17 p.m. CST

    cosmic_dolphin -- many threads transcend the Ponds

    by HornOrSilk

    So the cracks can still be answered later. I also think this is not the last of the Ponds.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 4:21 p.m. CST

    You know what might be cool and funny

    by HornOrSilk

    We see an adventure dealing with the duck pond, showing that there is an answer, but it didn't deal with the Ponds.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 4:44 p.m. CST

    la la la I can't hear your spoilers. . .

    by Kathryn Gail

    . . .and am instead about to watch Silence in the Library/Forest of the Dead leading up to the US broadcast. I was going to do that a bit earlier, but got distracted by The Unicorn and the Wasp (the Agatha Christie one), which along with The Fires of Pompeii and tonight's-director Nick Hurran's The God Complex are stories I thought, when they first aired, were silly costume fun with CGI monsters I could take or leave but probably wouldn't revisit much, but which have really held up for me due to the terrific assortments of characters and detail. U&W's quick yet vice-ridden "where were you when ~ " flashbacks are really nicely put together--especially the Colonel's, with can-can girls and pinups appropriate to his age. I'm a little anxious about TATM because while I'm in awe of Moffat's exceptional gonna-make-you-cry skills, a good cry isn't really what I tune in to anything for. His good cries have never felt gratuitous even when he announces in advance that a particular story is going to make you cry, so. . . I hope this isn't that proverbial first time that there's supposed to be for everything. . .

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 5:08 p.m. CST

    My god that was awful.

    by leroyspoboys

    I've never been a fan of the Ponds (and much less so this season). I preferred pre-Centurion Rory/Semi-Slutty Amelia all on her own. But regardless; what a crappy way for them to go out. Poorly written, badly directed, and some of the acting...holy sheep shit that was just, well, bad. And what a waste of a River Song appearance. Even that was phoned in. I really wish I could pardox that thing out of my brain.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 5:13 p.m. CST

    Whotininnies and a Pond Farewell

    by Ken Plume

    Though we touch on a lot about the mechanics of the departure, one thing that we didn't (but hey, more fodder for next episode) is exactly what locks the Ponds away from the Doctor. Perhaps the touch of the Angels makes it impossible for the victim to travel through time - It is an energy they're feeding off of, after all. And remember - the Doctor has nearly always been selfish when it comes to those who travel with him. He often thinks about himself first - HIS need to have companionship. And his first instinct tends to be to run away from a problem. He's a reluctant hero who would much rather not have to deal with the problems of others.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 5:14 p.m. CST

    Statue of Liberty

    by ElPaw

    Noone noticed the Statue of Liberty walking around New York?

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 5:17 p.m. CST

    Duck Pond

    by jacksparness

    Really not getting the big fuss about this. The ducks were taken by the cracks. End of. Why can't you guys let go of it.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 5:19 p.m. CST

    I think that those actors karen Gillan and Arthur Darvill

    by popboy

    were shafted in a way to make way for Jenna Louise colman. their story begged for a proper climax and some decent backstory answers. We all knew the ponds were leaving. but their departure was terrible and terribly rushed. you have just seen your parents die and what not a bit teary eyed, river, not even a little bit. the way the ponds were dispensed with was brutal. It was a good episode well shot and that and i stayed watching right to the end. but it lacked a heart.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 5:27 p.m. CST

    kenplume the problem with that

    by HornOrSilk

    In Blink, the Doctor and Martha both were touched by the Angels.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 5:28 p.m. CST

    Don't apologise caractacuspotts!

    by steverogers5

    That Edith Keeler suggestion is just genius. I almost wish I had a holodeck now to create it!

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 5:34 p.m. CST

    hornorsilk - Inconsistency

    by Ken Plume

    And I would argue that inconsistency is a hallmark of Doctor Who. :)

  • Now, I agree that it's silly that the Statue of Liberty wouldn't have been seen if it had been striding from Ellis Island all the way over to Winter Quay. However, I think that they gave us the answer for what was going on without actually drawing attention to it. In the back of the elevator in Winter Quay was a picture of the Statue of Liberty. An image of an Angel IS an Angel. I think it was actually that image coming to life (and presumably expanding to normal size) that we saw. It would be travelling not as far. The only problem with the theory was that we did hear quite a few footsteps before Amy and Rory saw it - maybe it was circling the block or something. Still, that would make a little more sense than the real Statue itself out for a stroll.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 5:41 p.m. CST

    Will someone please just answer me one thing...

    by CptBlood

    Rory's carrying three coffees in his hands, River stops him, tells him to put his hands up... WHERE DID THE COFFEE GO ?!?! It was such a continuity problem I thought they'd come back to it, but no. What happened to the damn coffee ?

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 5:44 p.m. CST

    Usually I'd be a bit more indepth

    by tomdolan04

    or insightful. Or passionate. Or anything. I'd launch into a talk about the Moffs strengths and weaknesses. Or run over the highlights and lowlights of the episode. But honestly...the episode. Just left me empty. <p> The episode is OK. Nothing wrong with it. Perfectly functional. Murray Golds score blares through telling the audience throughout how they should think and feel. Emotional beats vary and they try to hit all notes to please the family audience. But I think Im honestly 'just a watcher' as opposed to a fan now with Who as it stands in it's modern incarnation. Smith is great. Gillan and Rory as actors and people in interview seem great. a fan from early McCoy to Nu-Who upto somewhere (and I don't know where) in S6, something very big is missing. <p>

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 5:44 p.m. CST


    by HornOrSilk

    The crack in time got it

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 5:53 p.m. CST

    I enjoyed that, and dealing with gamma-ray joe's *spoilers*

    by DoctorTom

    We knew there was going to be Rory and/or Amy sent back in time. It was clever for Moffatt to pull it off multiple times. So, we don't get the 1990 badge or Melody being raised actually brought up in this story, but it's certainly possible that it happened. They were in New York and could have picked up Melody (especially if River leaves them some clues, and we know that River gets in touch with Amy at least once after going back in time). As for the badge, maybe the Doctor travels back to 2008 sometime prior to his first visit, nicks Rory's badge and replaces it with one that has the year 1990 on it so that when he saw the badge the first time around the odd year number attracts his attention to Rory as well as his photographing people on the ground when the world's ending. Or, Auton Rory was a nurse back in 1990, and his badge fell through a crack and ended up in this universe. As for the Doctor not going back to see the Ponds, he certainly could if he wants to, but right now he's probably worried of causing another paradox that would destroy New York. He knows how things get around him, and he probably wouldn't want to risk something that changed time. Although, that said, he's being stupid on this. He could still adventure with them and let them die at some point without there being a problem. For someone who figured out how to beat his own death with the Teselecta, at some point he should realize that he didn't see them die, all he saw was a tombstone that listed their names and their ages when they died. And the tombstone could easily have been a lie. Right now I just think the shock doesn't have him thinking straight, and even if he went back to see him it would probably be like picking scabs, him thinking (unless he comes to his senses, Clara we need you to show up soon and slap some sense into him) that he can't risk putting them in danger. I really liked how the titles were this time, as dark as they were. I hope they keep it this dark (if not even go a bit darker) with future episodes - though maybe not the Christmas episode, I see a red and green wrapped title on that one, with the red and green showing up as lighting after the title shows. And, I like how the time tunnel effect is when the lightning's crackling and running around the edges, it's looking a bit more like the 70's time tunnel effect.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 5:57 p.m. CST


    by DoctorTom

    at the 10:05 mark, when he puts his hands up, there's also a sound like the cups hitting the ground. I didn't see a continuity error there.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 6:01 p.m. CST

    followup on that, cptblood

    by DoctorTom

    You see the cups in his hand, and it's the same shot when he puts his hands up, so he obviously dropped them (like I said, you hear the sound). They don't bother panning down to show the ground when the car comes up to take them off.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 6:03 p.m. CST

    The coffees

    by SgtHowie

    were in Rory's hands, then he just lets go when he puts his hands up. The cups are there and then the hands go up all in the same shot so no continuity slip up really.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 6:06 p.m. CST

    Ha ha

    by SgtHowie

    I type so slowly. :-) Maybe the scene needed some dropping coffee music from Mr Gold to help the audience know what was going on. :-)

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 6:57 p.m. CST


    by AM1

    Hi, I'm new. I may have discovered something but I would like a second opinion from someone with a higher quality television. Does River have noticeable lines under her eyes after she escapes from the Angel holding her wrist but not before?

  • BBCAmercia has made it an all afternoon event. Interesting to see seemingly new interviews with not just the current cast, but Tennant, Barrowman & good old Mickey. Oh--and yes, Rory drops the coffees as he puts his hands up--they showed them filming in NYC & that was one of the scenes. They were followed around NYC by hundreds of fans as they filmed & seemed surprised that it/they was so popular here. Counting down--22 minutes

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 7:38 p.m. CST

    *Spoilers* River

    by Fitz

    ...pardoned because someone's been wiping databases... NAILED IT. Eyethangewe! Eat it, HATters :) Glad the Ponds got their happy ever after. Lovely farewell.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 7:40 p.m. CST

    Beautiful. Loved it.

    by veteran_of_mu

    Yes, doesn't tie it all up. But ties it up. Restored my faith - nice work Mr The Moff.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 7:40 p.m. CST

    Oh, and Merrick, sent you email yesterday - did you get it?

    by veteran_of_mu

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 7:52 p.m. CST

    Answer for cptblood

    by robg113

    He dropped them when he saw the man with the gun.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 8:14 p.m. CST


    by dj_bollocks

    I really wanted to love it... and I hate myself for having a whine but... Colour me disappointed. I mean yes it's Doctor Who and anything can happen but The Ponds/River timeline just doesn't add up unless there are still holes to fill... And one suspects that'll be a nice happy ending for Matt's regeneration, maybe. I mean Rory's timeline... how does that even work ? I'm probably about to go back 180 on what I said the other week.... Oh for a period of simple intelligent space fantasy, with only a smattering of soap opera. Rushed, not as smart as it liked to think it was and for the first time I'm starting to worry about The Moff's godlike genius... That can't be good...

  • I double checked. It was very odd.

  • At least it felt like a full TV episode, so I didn't find the pacing an issue. I do agree though like many recent episodes it does feel emotionally empty, and there was a lot of questionable logic. I wasn't expecting any answers re: duck ponds, cracks, the voice, Rory coming back from the dead, etc. I've long since given up on there being any master plan to any of that stuff. I think this episode would have played much better if the Ponds leaving had not been known in advance. It still does feel kind of ruthless though, especially with all the stuff with Brian last week just to know he will never see them again. River's reaction also felt completely wrong. I do like those glasses on the doctor, they should become a fixture.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 8:21 p.m. CST

    Nice spoiler in description lol - knew it was coming but not when

    by FrodoFraggins

    But I'm saving the episodes to watch later and am ready to see the ponds go.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 8:28 p.m. CST

    Good ep, but not great

    by glenn_the_frog

    The angels do need to be retired for a bit. They're not being given the respect and scariness, space to breathe, like they did in Blink, and without that focus, they're just monsters of the week. When they're a sideline to a bigger plot, they just don't work as well... or maybe its just the novelty and creativity has worn off with familiarity. As far as the Ponds departure, and the Doctor meeting them again... folks are over-analyzing that bit. The Doc never seeing them again is NOT about creating a paradox. Its about choosing that point and saying goodbye. It was more about Amy and Rory getting older and choosing that life, than a paradox. That was the entire thing about her and the glasses... she was getting too old for this... and she and Rory spent much of the previous episode talking about just living a normal, non-doctor life.... this time around they chose each other... and to spend the rest of their lives together. It doesn't rule out one more meeting anyway... 50th anniversary is around the corner. Stuff happens for the specials. The doctor can still find and meet them at some point and have a lunch... (River certainly did) but he can't drag them off on crazy adventures anymore. They now HAVE to end up in New York in their old age... (or at least a tombstone does) but it doesn't mean they can't be in France in 1972 when the Daleks invade when a future adventure happens to be there. There is NOTHING stopping that. But it means they shouldn't be risked on an adventure in their fifties (and they were getting older, which was the point) that could get them killed... cause that could rip open a new paradox. Their personal timeline is pretty much set now... the Doctor can still meet them again... hence the entire point of him visiting young amy. There's still gaps in there, an entire lifetime, he can fill in... but thats not nearly as poigniant. He got a goodbye with Amy. And it turned out to be young Amy that he said goodbye to. The Doctor hates goodbyes. So he made his final time seeing Amy a Hello instead.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 8:30 p.m. CST


    by glenn_the_frog

    ...that Amy had at least a little idea of everything that was going to happen. Since the Doctor told her, at least in brief, of the adventures she would one day have. So she probably knew she was nearing the end of the childhood list.

  • I'm confused by the ending, didn't everything hing on the fact that she waited all that time for him and he didn't come back until 12 years later, that was why she was so messed up. If he just went back and saw her as a kid, doesn't that effectively erase all of seasons 5 & 6?

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 8:45 p.m. CST

    I do agree the angels were probably best to be just left in BLINK

    by Rebel Scumb

    that episode is so great, that any further use of them just risks diminishing their impact. Though I think the 2 parter with them in season 5 is pretty good overall, and they were used fairly well in this one (I was glad to see the 'they send you back in time to live to death' angle back, since them just snapping necks feels a lot less interesting)

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 9:01 p.m. CST


    by MattDomville

    Just sigh. Pretty annoying episode. Also mad that Amy took her husband's name.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 9:02 p.m. CST

    Some interesting bits on the BBC site...

    by dj_bollocks


  • Sept. 29, 2012, 9:06 p.m. CST

    Fuck the Angels

    by PDepew2181

    If I ever see them again, I won't watch that episode. I might give up on this whole thing as it is. Absolutely hated the ending. Moffat's as full of himself as RTD. So the Angels are actually an entity that possess statues, is that it now? Really hate the SOL being one. Such a gimmicky villain who have become overused, kinda like the Borg were in Star Trek. If the Christmas episode isn't really good, I'm just passing on this show.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 9:10 p.m. CST

    Loved It--bittersweet and heartbreaking--SPOILERS

    by batmancw

    I guess I'm easy to please compared to a lot of you, but then I love the Ponds, River & I still find the Weeping Angels to be very creepy. It did remind me of when Tennant's Doctor lost Rose, and also of her final resolution with good old Doctordonna since we know that Amy & Rory did live "happily ever after". Sad to see the Ponds go, but for me, it was a fitting goodbye & that they both sacrificed themselves for the other so that they could be together was a perfect ending.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 9:16 p.m. CST

    What am I missing?

    by John Burcke

    If River can go back and meet with Amy about her novel, why can't the doctor?

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 9:18 p.m. CST

    Rebel - I'm not sure if it messes up Seasons 5 and 6 or not

    by DoctorTom

    We did hear that TARDIS sound the first time around, so it seems that it's worked into the normal history. I would have expected some slightly different reactions from Amy though if she did know as a child. I suppose it depends on how the Doctor told her. Of course, it could always be waved away as the Doctor going and telling the post-Big Bang Amelia, and Amy's working off the pre-Big Bang memories or something like that. I think the place we get into the biggest trouble is what happens to Time of the Angels/Flesh and Stone. The comments of River's being pardoned because the person she killed didn't exist doesn't fit well with the Church giving her one mission that her pardon depends on. It sounded like they tried to have the River today be between the Byzantium and the Library versions, but something still feels off. Did that story ever happen?

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 9:28 p.m. CST

    Whotininnies, for those that care...

    by Ken Plume

    Whotininnies 14: Pond For Pond Ken and Glen say farewell to the companions Pond in a bit of a continuity walkabout. SPOILER WARNINGS all around.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 9:29 p.m. CST

    Rebel Scumb, Glenn the Frog - River and the Doctor's reactions

    by DoctorTom

    Rebel Scumb, I agree that River's reaction seems off - unless the theory that's been thrown around about Amy and Rory being thrown into the past and raising Melody after all are true. In the scene after Rory's gone and Amy's talking about having the Angel send her back too, River's reaction seemed to fit what I'd expect if she suddenly realized that this is the moment that has to come in order for her parents to raise her in her past. It wouldn't surprise me if we hear about this at some point (even if we don't see Amy or Rory again, it could be something that River tells the Doctor in a future story). Glenn the Frog - you're saying that we're overanalyzing the Doctor's reaction. I'd say that your explanation though doesn't quite fit. He seems too panicked when Amy's talking about having the Angel send her back into the past for him to be thinking that things are going to work out and that he's merely cutting the cord at that point. He's reacting like he's never going to see her again, more than him just making the choice not to - that he WON'T be able to see him again. I agree that he should be able to see him, since it's easy enough to fake the tombstone, but that's obviously not something he's thinking. I can certainly believe he'll come around to that thinking later, but not at that moment. Just as an interesting side note, if we've had Rory and Amy sent back into the past in America, it's certainly possible that at some point after 1969 they might look up their friend Canton Everett Delaware III. It wouldn't surprise me if the older version we saw in Utah was still hanging around with them in 2011 (if they're still alive then).

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 9:29 p.m. CST

    There would be nothing stopping them...

    by dj_bollocks

    ...sending a letter to themselves when the Doctor stayed to change the future... They wouldn't have seen the book or the gravestone at that point so it wasn't fixed in time... And as has been said, Martha and The Doctor managed to get back in Blink, and of course time can be rewritten... Make the rules, break the rules but please be consistent...

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 9:34 p.m. CST

    Looked like the new companion just spotted the Titanic.

    by whatevillurks

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 9:49 p.m. CST

    Literally did not even understand that. Spoilers.

    by david

    The building is a farm? Angels feed off energy when you go back in time. so how does moving you once and then keeping you in bed for 50 years feed them? Lazy lazy lazy explanation as to why the doc cannot go back and change anything. Tardis would blow up NY? Fine - go to New Jersey and jump on the fucking train you Gallifrayan chimp. Rory and Amy both get tapped by the angels... but they live happily ever after??? WTF? I wanted to like it and I kept on trying to swat away the plot holes, but eventually I blinked and noticed how little sense it all made. Also, why would Rory & Amy be so quick to jump?? They're used to the Doc doing all kinds of mad shit to save the day. But in five minutes they decide to kill themselves. I enjoyed it as a goodbye and a character study but damn that was poorly plotted.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 9:53 p.m. CST

    Nice Sherlock reference though...

    by dj_bollocks

    Did you get it ?

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 10:05 p.m. CST

    I'm gonna miss the Ponds POSSIBLE SPOILERS

    by Evil Chicken

    Christmas can't come fast enough. So what's the over/under on the Doctor having a Dalek for a companion?

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 10:06 p.m. CST


    by DoctorTom

    On your first point, it was established back in Blink, the Angels' first appearance, that they send people into the past and feed off the time energy from that somehow. The purpose of keeping the people in the building is more likely to keep them from wandering around not being able to create a paradox that gets rid of them. It's easier to do that with your reed stock kept in a cage rather than letting them be free ranging food. On the second point, the way the Doctor talks after the paradox saying he can't go back to that time ever sounds like it's more than just limited to that time in New York - if it's like the blizzard analogy you'd have to be far enough away to be able to land, and presumably it's not close enough to be able to get over there in time. Yes, Rory and Amy live happily ever after. In Blink, the people had perfectly happy lives after being sent into the past, they just die in the past or not long after they were sent back, calendar-wise. The note from Sally's friend indicated she had a good life, and the cop didn't have any regrets. In that episode, you even had the Doctor referring to what the Angels do as killing you with kindness. Rory being so quick to jump - there was the conversation indicating that the paradox should cancel everything out. He trusts the Doctor on that. Also, between The Eleventh Hour and Vampires of Venice he had been studying the latest scientifc theories (as indicated in Vampires), he's probably read stuff that would back up what was said in the conversation about paradoxes. If it's the type of thing that can be talked about on the internet related to time travel, he's probably googled it. He's also had experience with dying and coming back. Amy's wanting to go with him is the same attitude she had back in Amy's Choice, not wanting to go on without him. Ironic attitude, though, given that she outlasts him by about 6 years (of course those 5 years might have been her being sent back slightly further than Rory).

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 10:10 p.m. CST

    Did anyone else think in the graveyard... (spoilers)

    by Rebel Scumb

    when at first they thought everything had wrapped up happily when the doctor and river rushed into the Tardis they were going to leave amy and rory behind because they knew something was about to go wrong? Their behavior in that scene seemed very odd, like they were in on a terrible truth about the Ponds fates that the Ponds didn't know and wanted to flee the scene of the crime quickly. But I guess they really were just going to go for a happy family picnic.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 10:12 p.m. CST

    the purpoe of the farm...

    by Rebel Scumb

    It wasn't explained very well, but the idea (I believe) was that several versions of the same people were in there, the angels would send them back in time, then send them back again, and again, taking them from youth to old age without them ever being able to leave. The implication was that the little girl in the window and the old woman were the same person. Or at least that was how I took it. It also bothered me that the doctor seemed completely unconcerned with helping any of these people.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 10:13 p.m. CST

    Oh what a mess

    by Angus Gore

    Emotional scenes with annoying music that didn't add up to much. We're 'told' what to believe but nothing about all the excuses given makes sense. Time can be re-written, now it can't. A fixed point prevents the Doctor from ever seeing Amy and Rory again. Why is that? Will someone please take this show away from Moffat? I'm sure he's a lovely guy, but if this is the direction of the show, we're only getting chapter headings, not chapters. Pretty scenes and no real plot. He does best imagining the inner lives of these characters, but I never sensed one for Rory and only a tiny one for Amy. It all feels fake. Well, it's just a show, innit? He had such a strong start in season five. I guess the need to be 'cool' took over.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 10:23 p.m. CST


    by david

    I'm a casual fan so I won't try to beat you on cannon knowledge, but some of what you say is soooo unsatisfying if its true: If the angels send you back in time once... but somehow keep feeding off you.. but keep you cooped up, then how do people lead normal lives and write letters telling people how happy they are? The angles let the mailman in every day?? It doesn't seem to make sense. Second point: So go far enough away. Land in Paraguay in 1934 and take your time getting to NY. That's just weak, lazy plotting. He's 1200 years old fer' chrissakes. Third point: The show - brilliantly - gives us impossible situations every week... which the Doctor solves with a wave of the old sonic and a smile. It's not that they would never jump, its just that they decided to so quickly. Again, you know the world of the show better than I do and you're probably right on all three counts. But very big, heavy decisions got justified so quickly and easily - I just found it too much of a stretch. Too throwaway - fast food plotting. As always with the new series, the set-up was promising and lots of great plates were set spinning. and, then, BAM - we were done in ten minutes flat. I liked a lot of it but it burns me that they couldn't have been more air tight with the plot. It just managed to take me out of the episode and get me thinking "hmmmm". And I'm not usually that person. Oh well, onward and upward for Xmas. I hope the new companion is wonderful and new and different.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 10:36 p.m. CST

    gah! just lost my too-spoilery-anyway comments. . .

    by Kathryn Gail

    ~~and I'll wait (possibly forever if my attention wanders) to reconstruct them in case they mysteriously appear after all, since I hit return by mistake. But. . . basically. . . that episode very very very unexpectedly made me giggle a lot over all the plot holes and melodrama, much as I'm not at all a Pond-hater and basically enjoy all the time I spend with the Ponds even when it's silly. And. . . fixed points in time being caused by. . . reading (where did that even come from)???? Wouldn't Cap'n Jack have long since locked every moment in all of time texting everyone "and then suddenly you have no pants on?" (*gasp* *light bulb* is that. . . why so many statues. . . HAVE NO PANTS ON?)

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 10:38 p.m. CST


    by david

    'fixed point' seems to be used like 'reversing the polarity'. It's just a catch-all idea that lets Moff cut off plot points without any reason. As for the rest of your rant, keep calm and don't blink. It's just a show. And a show everyone here loves.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 10:38 p.m. CST

    Oh and RE: Overused Angel

    by nrn

    The angels have been in a total of FOUR episodes now. They are better villains than the Daleks, The Sontarans, The Sliveen, The Cybermen, and countless other who enemies that have appeared quite frequently through out the ages. They are a new addition to the universe. They have appeared 4 times, three if you count the S5 eps as one. Why the fuck are you complaining?

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 10:48 p.m. CST


    by nrn

    We've only seen a few fixed points on the show - NuWho S1 the ep with Rose's dad, River Killing the doctor. And a few others. Then we've seen NON fixed points like The Hungry Earth where Homo Reptillia had a chance to come back since it wasn't Fixed, they hadn't known the outcome. If you know what happens you can't change a fixed point in history. What this means: When Rory jumped to his death with Amy, he ALWAYS had jumped to his death with Amy. Otherwise it would have been a complete paradox with no need for the book. And on the subject of the book -- it was the reason the doctor even knew what happened to Rory, they couldn't tell otherwise as he just popped off to get a coffee. The book solidifies the Fixed point, as there could be no book unless as Daniel Farady on lost says "What happened, happened." It always ended with Rory being zapped back in the Cemetery. The afterword was written BEFORE they went back in time. Fixed point. Everything happened as it always were to happen. The last page the doctor ripped out of the book proves that. The gravestone changing was just to get the players in the right place.<br><br> When dealing with time travel in the form of TARDIS it has rules. It can't change history, and most of the time it even causes it (Fires of Pompeii). River knew the whole time since she was from the future and knew the past, that's why she was there investigating the Angels in the first place.<br><br> You guys need to stop watching predictable TV and pay closer attention to every episode of Who. I've seen at least every ep since Nu S1 at least 4-6 times per episode including the one that aired today. The writing is way better, and if you pay close attention you can see what is coming before it happens. this is how last year I guessed Doctor Who? Would be the question after the plot was introduced to the show, everyone here flogged me off, and then what happened? The question was Doctor Who. Pit this against the finalie of any US show, and it will win 9/10 times.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 10:52 p.m. CST

    RE: patrickstewart

    by nrn

    Captain Jack himself is a Fixed point in time and space. It has said that on two occasions one on Torchwood and one on Doctor Who. It's the events around him that are not fixed. We've seen a fixed point that can't be changed because it will cross their own timeline. This was an example of that, just as when Jack was buried alive by his brother and was dug up. he was put on ice because he can't cross his own time stream. The doctor can't cross his stream either, and since he went to Manhattan in that year and a fix point was created, he is basically locked out of that time, until Amy and Rory die, otherwise it would have been a double paradox which likely would have ripped open the world, as it almost did when they landed in NY.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 11:01 p.m. CST


    by DoctorTom

    In Blink, they weren't kept cooped up, they left normal lives. The one that got Rory at the end of the episode was said to be a survivor, so the place they had been using as a farm had been destroyed. People it sent into the past wouldn't be cooped up. Second point - go back and watch last week's episode. The Doctor was going bonkers after 4 days. He's not going to think of taking the slow route (which would actually be doing something like going - without Amy - to 1928 New York then spending 10 years waiting). He's wanting to get there as quick as possible to rescue his father-in-law. That's not lazy plotting, it's perfectly in character. I think the decision to jump was perfectly fine - it had already been talked about, and Rory knew it was the only way to resolve the paradox and also save Amy from the Angels. So, he was ready to jump. It made sense that he wouldn't think of having Amy jump with him, and it makes perfect sense for Amy to want to (as established in previous episodes where she doesn't want to live if Rory's dead). If you're a casual viewer, you might not have seen the episodes where some of this stuff was established, so it might seem more rushed to you when they've had that kind of experience before. Then again, this episode was for wrapping up things with the Ponds and used the Weeping Angels, so it's fair for Moffat to act based on what he's established for them before. The setting the plates spinning then being done quickly seems to be the hallmark this season, though today had a false ending before the real climax back in the present. We'll see how things are with the new companion, it seems like she'll be set up for working at a faster pace. Maybe for season 8 we'll get some 2 parters again and have a chance for some stories to breathe a little. Or Moffat can convince the BBC on some of the episodes to let them go a little bit longer, like RTD was able to do with season finale stories.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 11:06 p.m. CST

    globalinquest - fixed points in time

    by DoctorTom

    Time can be rewritten, but they've always said that if it's happened in their personal timeline that it can't - or at least can't without consequences. Rose tried that in Season 1 and almost destroyed the world. River did it last season and collapsed all time on Earth into one time, and setting the universe well on the way to collapsing. The Doctor only got away with some shenanigans with time in The Big Bang because he was in a collapsing universe already (hence being able to pull the tricks like saving himself). This hasn't changed since the show came back and they actually expressed how things go with fixed points and points that aren't fixed. Given that, the Doctor's lucky that the paradox only took out the Angels, and it makes perfect sense that another paradox would destroy New York City.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 11:13 p.m. CST

    I'll miss Amy. Not Rory. And I still say River's a hag

    by FeralAngel

    Well, now that Amy's gone, and also the fun Amy/Doctor chemistry, I think I'm done with Doctor Who. So adieu, farewell, auf wiedersehen and kungaloosh!

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 11:19 p.m. CST


    by DoctorTom

    While I appreciate your enthusiasm for the story (as I said, I like it too), you really should pay attention to the Docback policy. Swearing in your message header and telling people to pull their heads out of their asses certainly goes outside the policy, and they do take the policy seriously here. Oh, I do agree that the Angels haven't been overused yet - really only 3 stories plus a cameo in The God Complex. Every two or three years isn't bad for them, though. Daleks got worn out from overuse, and it took Moffat giving them a rest for a season (except for the cameo of the one almost dead one in The Wedding of River Song) and a decent story for people to go *oh no, not again* when he used them this year - and still some people were saying it. I wouldn't want the Angels getting to that level. Besides, he still has a lot of 'spainin' to do about the Silents and should be worrying about them instead. ;) Weeping Angels and Silents, though, do belong at least on the second tier of good villains, if you have only the Daleks and Cybermen on the first tier, which some people do. They're certainly as good as the Sontarans, Silurians, Ice Warriors, Yeti and Zygons (who got namechecked last week - yaaay! Getting teased by almost getting to see the adventure with them, and seeing their ship in The Pandorica Opens, maybe we'll actually get to see them back soon enough.)

  • More than Mr. Moffat did when he wrote it. I've just watched 'Blink' again, which in all honesty was a bad move. 'Blink' is a Swiss watch of story-telling craftsmanship. This is an clumsy, rushed mess despite riffing on pretty much all of its predecessors' beats. Karen and Arthur deserved better, and I agree - there IS something missing from this season; the total engagement that I usually get from being drawn in by well-written episode. Here's hoping the Christmas special is the reboot this great show needs once more. Or, more likely since we know the fate of the new companion, we'll have a whole feast of dropped clues and red-herrings about how Oswin gets to be on that ship in 'Asylum' just so Moffat can dazzle us all with season-long timey-wimey shenanigans...

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 11:22 p.m. CST

    feralangel - don't stick the fork in it and turn it over yet

    by DoctorTom

    give Clara a chance, at least, to see what the chemistry is between her and the Doctor. It could easily be the equivalent of someone who started at the beginning of Tom Baker stopping watching after Sarah Jane left, only to miss out on all the fun with Leela, then Romana. Besides, the next story looks like we'll have Madame Vastra and Jenny back, as well as another Sontaran from the same clone batch as Commander Strax (this time as a butler intead of a nurse), so there's still some fun to be had.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 11:28 p.m. CST

    One question:

    by aramis2112

    At the end, when they're in the graveyard, River says "So...Rory and Amy. They're going to get terribly bored hanging around here all day." What was that? I took it to mean that A & R were stuck in that graveyard somehow. Also, Amy's name only appeared on the stone at the end after she was touched by the angel. Why was rory's name on the stone before he was touched?

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 11:41 p.m. CST

    A note on the time travel mechanics of Superman

    by James Taylor

    I'm not going to comment on the episode because without fail I've been underwhelmed with every episode I've seen on BBC America, only to enjoy them 10 times as much (warts and all) when I see them later on DVD or Netflix. Something about having the commercials and the general image/audio quality on BBCA makes them less interesting, so I'll have to revisit this in a few months before I come to any firm conclusions. I enjoyed it though (despite some headscratching plotholes), so I'll probably love it when I see it again. So, Superman. I saw the Ain't it Cool video at the top and the reaction to "The earth spinning backwards". Except it doesn't. Sure, I thought the same thing when I first saw it, but my excuse was that I was 5 ;) Film a ball spinning to the right, now reverse the film. What happens? The ball appears to spin to the left. Superman is not making the Earth spin backwards - he's *going back in time*, so the film is being run backwards (as it is in all the closeups of things happening actually on earth). I've never understood why so many people have so trouble reaching this conclusion, but it makes a hell of a lot more sense than "Superman flew round the Earth really fast so the whole planet started spinning the other way" :)

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 11:41 p.m. CST

    I will say...

    by Kevin Bolinger

    I liked it, it was bittersweet, almost made me cry...but still, I liked it. Not gonna go into over speculation, really, not needed. I guess I am not as picky as some... :P

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 11:43 p.m. CST

    Who and Fixed Points

    by Alientoast

    Waters of Mars sort of solidified the whole Fixed Point idea. No matter the means, the end remains the same. Even the Doctor cannot alter those, which is why he freaked out when Amy said she was going to let the angel displace her.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 11:46 p.m. CST


    by DoctorTom

    The bit about Amy and Rory getting bored hanging around all day I took as meaning that the Doctor and River were going to be busy cleaning up the TARDIS and doing things that, when the Doctor has seen others doing it, has told them to breathe... Realistically Amy's name should have been there all along. It was a dramatic conceit for the reveal of Amy's name to not happen until she's made the decision and the Angel sends her back. Maybe Rory's name was on the stone originally because of the original sending him back, but it changed some. I don't think they showed down far enough initially to see if his age had been listed. And, to be fair, this can always turn out to be a bogus tombstone, or a misleading tombstone. For all we know, River takes them to the 42nd century, they live long and happy lives there while River goes back to plant the tombstone (though more likely it's in 20th/21st century Earth, probably playing cards with Canton Everett Delaware III and his boyfriend, and raising young Melody). Or, the Silents made us all forget that Amy's name was on the tombstone until after she was sent into the past. ;)

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 11:48 p.m. CST

    One loose end, though, that really should have been dealt with

    by DoctorTom

    did the Doctor and River actually leave that Angel in the graveyard so that it can feed on other people? I didn't catch any mention of its fate. Part of me wants to think that it ends up being the Angel that ended up on the Byzantium.

  • Sept. 29, 2012, 11:50 p.m. CST

    hqn - very good point

    by DoctorTom

    the places where BBCA picks to go to commercial seem strange and definitely interrupt the flow of the story. You're right on the Superman thing, it was just them trying to show Supes travelling back in time himself by flying fast enough. Now, if there was only as good an explanation for his Repair-the-Great-Wall-of-China-vision in the story... ;)

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:17 a.m. CST

    Why River wasn't upset.

    by leroyspoboys

    Can't believe I'm making excuses for such a shitty and rushed episode, but...after a few hours sleep and another viewing (which made me dislike the episode even more): River can go back to see her parents any time she likes. She has a vortex manipulator, smaller and more agile than the Tardis. The Doctor says the Tardis can't go back because it will paradox and 'rip NYC apart'. The Tardis is a major piece of kit powered by a sentient being so I can see that. Little vortex manipulator G-Shock? Not so much. Maybe that's why it was set up that way as being more of an agile time travel device at the beginning of the episode. But considering how badly done and full of holes this episode was, I doubt it. River slipping in and out of 18____ (whatever Rory's age is minus the remainder of his 82 years) with her little wrist thing shouldn't be a problem. Plus she has to go back to send the manuscript anyway. So if there is a Pardox, it must be a pretty small/localized one in the time stream around the time of this episode She's probably sitting back with her feet up in NYC somewhere, circa the late 1800's, having a glass of wine with her parents right now. The only way they can get me to forget this awful episode is to convince me how a delusional Dalek gets to be the next companion before the credits on the Christmas episode roll. Good luck with that one. Unless they meet before the crash that sets up 'Asylum' and she's turned into a Dalek, for which the Doctor will know she'll become a Dalek in the future and she's would have recognized him in 'Asylum'....ugh, I see more massive plot holes coming already.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:26 a.m. CST

    Just listened to my first Whotaninnies...

    by Kevin Bolinger

    Great podcast. Ken, Glen, very nicely done. I actually record podcasts with some friends from time to time on the Geekcast Radio Network, usually the Team Botimus Hour. If you guys ever want a guest opinion during one of these, I would be happy to throw my two cents in with long as no one bad mouths Pertwee :P

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:49 a.m. CST

    That was better than LOOPER

    by quintana007

    i think. But how about a new bunch of fresh baddies? Daleks, Angels, Cybermen... it's getting boring

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:50 a.m. CST

    well to be a bit more serious this time (nrn)

    by Kathryn Gail

    Well I wasn't seriously attempting to throw Captain Jack into the mechanics of this episode (I just picked him as the kind of guy likely to send prank written notes), but just taking issue a bit with the sudden overemphasis on written description of events, which felt very contrived to me, especially considering how little objectivity there can be in any written account. The writer invariably takes a little artistic license, or recalls something incorrectly, or what have you. It makes very little sense for a written account to lock events--if fact it would cause no end of discontinuities! Also, we never see a date of death for Rory or Amy, just an age, so it's entirely possible that Rory's death as we saw it remained substantially as it was (with fewer angels around). 82 is a ripe old age for 1938 (and the state of geriatric medicine at the time would have made a former male nurse a VERY grumpy old man), and 80-something-year-old Amy could have just been in the next room for all we know; 82-year-old Rory could easily have been that emotional just seeing young Amy as he felt his death approaching.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 1:40 a.m. CST

    Saw it god that script was full of holes

    by spike fan

    most obvious being how come 1 touch sends Rory and Amy back in time while Rivers whole arm is held and nothing happens? Then there was the whole collector of the Angels. What was the point of him and why capture Rory only to lock him in the room with the child Angels? And the whole statue of liberty angel again there was no point. The whole script felt like a rush job of 1st draft ideas that Moffat was throwing against a wall to see what stuck. Sorry but if that had been RTD rather than Moff who made that episode he would have (properly) been ripped to shreds by posters on here. Why the double standard. Still at least the Ponds are gone thats been way overdue.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 1:41 a.m. CST

    badwulf12969 - breaking it to Brian

    by DoctorTom

    Rory might be breaking the news himself (it depends on how long after The Power of Three this story takes place). Then again, if Rory and Amy were sent back far enough, we might find out that Brian is Rory's son, which makes Rory his own grandpa. And would make River Brian's sister and granddaughter. And the Doctor Brian's brother-in-law as well as grandson-in-law. If this turned out to be true, though, I'm sure Rory would need several aspirin when trying to think about it.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 1:45 a.m. CST

    All those on here who are hoping that all the plot threads

    by spike fan

    will be filled in I suspect may have a long wait. Moffs got form for writing up over complicated plot threads that go no where. Not just the previous season on Who or the last season on Sherlock but go watch Jeykll exact same thing there (with similar stories uncannily enough). Moffs been coasting off a couple off good standalone episodes for awhile now while his main plots go no where

  • It explored something I have been far too familiar with of late, sacrifice in the name of love. Much like Amelia, I sometimes didn't even realize it was happening, yet was sucked in all the same and had no choices *in the moment*. When it counted, I had no choice and there was no other option. So I guess you could say it resonated. Thank you , Mr Moffat, and here's that suggested *hug*. *hug* It is the last night in the home I have lived in for over 9 years now. This episode made me feel validated, no longer isolated, as well as hopeful. I'll leave you all with this thought... At times it feels like we make hard choices, but once those choices have been made, they do not seem like choices anymore. They seem more like *a ride*, and the choices were predetermined. No matter if it is true or not, it is how it feels. Most of all, when the choice is not easy.... but hard. Be well and I love you all, for all of this.

  • (the 1/2 time is the appearance in The God Complex where it turned out not to be them). Given that the appearances are in the 3rd, 5th and 7th season, that's not exactly overusing them. The Angels ARE fresh. Plus, you've had the Silents last year as a fresh baddie, as well as House and the Headless Monks, you have the Church that was out for the Doctor (if they still remember him), the Dream Lord, the Atraxi, Prisoner Zero's race, the Saturnine (fish vampires), the Krafayis, House, Gangers, Richard Nixon, and the Shakri - all under Moffat's tenure. Exactly how many more new, fresh baddies do you want? To be honest, the cry for fresh baddies is getting old, especially when trotted out in regards to a baddie that's recent and hasn't been used that much. I can see it being mentioned for Daleks and Cybermen (though it was a good Dalek story), but it doesn't need to be said for a race just because they've appeared once or twice before in the show.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 2:12 a.m. CST

    patrickstewartsaweverything - yours is a valid point

    by DoctorTom

    just because it's in writing doesn't mean it's true. I'm sure if the book had said *and then the Doctor gave me the keys to the TARDIS and I ran off to spend all the gold in the TARDIS at the planet of the mega-malls, after picking up Captain Jack for a bit of nookie. Meanwhile, the Doctor decided to become the scientific advisor to UNIT again and stay based on Earth*, the Doctor would be far more likely to say *what?*and question what's going on rather than to just hand over the keys. I'm not sure if it's the type of point that would be caught if someone else were script editing (we've certainly had a few whoppers slip by even in other people's scripts - Victory of the Daleks being an example). They list an assisstant script editor (though no script editor - that's really Moffat) - I would have thought he'd be looking for things like that.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 2:16 a.m. CST

    Did anyone catch a Christmas reference in this episode?

    by DoctorTom

    Or an egg reference, for that matter? We certainly had lights going out, and this time it actually was due to the Angels. They weren't causing the earlier ones, though. This looks more like a recurring motif type thing rather than one baddie manipulating things behind the scenes.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 2:16 a.m. CST

    @doctortom - Touché

    by quintana007

    i guess you're right. I might just remember them too well

  • or brighten them up again? Or even go darker? I liked how it was this episode. I'm wondering if they're going to continue having the color from the Doctor Who logo become a lighting shade for the credits after that in future episodes. One thing that makes me want to laugh, though - whenever they've shown the very dark opening credit part with the TARDIS flying through it, I keep having a flashback to Silence in the Library and hearing Dave ask *Hey, who turned out the lights?* If Moffat brings the Vashta Nerada back at some point, I'd love for him to put that in as a voiceover at the beginning of dark opening credits...

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 2:30 a.m. CST

    quintain - no problem

    by DoctorTom

    different people have different memories or different tolerances for some races. I don't think anybody really wants a second appearance from an Absorbaloff or even the Smilers as baddies (though presumably things have changed so that the Smilers wouldn't be used that way - I wouldn't mind another apperance by Liz10, though). I'm not sure people really want to see the Slitheen around again in Doctor Who (taking them to SJA made sense, they seemed to fit better there). The Weeping Angels have been pretty memorable when they've been used, so I can see where they'd stick in your head. I can see what you're saying, though. There's been plenty of fresh baddies. What you're probably looking for are really well done new baddies that can stack up to the best of the classic series. That we got the Weeping Angels and the Silence both from Moffat was good, really for the classic series I think only Robert Holmes did as well for putting out numbers of memorable baddies (though Holmes himself tended more for the individual person rather than races.)

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 2:55 a.m. CST

    The Doc's new companion

    by Mike J

    Forget about the boring Ponds. The important thing is that Jenna Louise acoleman is foing to make a sensational new compnaion when she joins the show perminantly. And for those of you who were unaware, Ms Coleman recently had a rather nice nude scene in the BBC adaption of Room At The Top, shown in the UK last week.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 3:52 a.m. CST

    I guess the AICN post counter thingy is broken?


    There's no way that the LAST RESORT pilot talkback is beating this episode's docback, surely.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 3:56 a.m. CST

    I thought Rory had been turned into an auton..

    by popboy

    and that meant he cannot die. but was the rory last night pre auton rory?

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 3:58 a.m. CST

    i dont like the way the ponds were written...

    by popboy

    where did the moody amy pond come from?

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 3:59 a.m. CST

    oh yeah,

    by popboy

    re amy, I forgot she was being turned into a dalek. and know she is dead.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 4:06 a.m. CST

    River's reaction

    by HornOrSilk

    I think it is as it is for two possible reasons 1) psychopath (she said it herself) 2) she knows she will be with them again

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 4:21 a.m. CST

    Ok some of my thoughts

    by HornOrSilk

    The fixed point comes from the convergence of two things: the paradox AND the book The book itself causes problems for the Doctor and the options he has. The angels no longer being there, the TARDIS problems are gone. I believe the real reason the Doctor can't visit them is because he knows he can't take them with him anymore, they are forced on earth at specific time and place -- they would cause problems with the TARDIS now if they entered into it. However, he hates staying around one place or saying goodbye. So it is his own problem which prevents him from going to visit. River doesn't have this problem. She will visit them. However, I do think it is possible for the Ponds to return for a story or more. There are ways to do it, including a story which takes place in historical New York. The farming idea is interesting. Normally, angels take one, send them back in time, and eat the time energy created. So to those, they are nice. The farm, however, is not the same. They choose some to take control, force to live in a particular place, and send back and use more than once. They don't get a happy fate. It seems that the angels don't do farms until they take control of an area. It takes a lot of energy -- first they hunt and send some back in time; as they build up power and less and less people are there, then they farm. The angels, it seems, can take control of other statues. However, it also seems to be a high-energy use thing to do. Sot they don't do it until in control of an area. Notice, New York is relatively empty now. I feel the angels really took over and most have been used up and fed upon. Now, the angel at the end, yes, what's up with it? Yet, what could the Doctor do?

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:27 a.m. CST

    I hate how we keep getting these big buildups

    by cosmic_dolphin

    ....and then not really delivering the payoff. The Doctor will Rise Higher Than Ever Then fall so Much Further....what did that amount to ? Taking over a military base and then realising it was a trap. Every Dalek Ever in One Epsisode ! ....meant a few in the background would be walked past. The Ponds Leaving will be So Emotional, People Will Die...well it wasn't that emotional , not one tear shed amongst the 5 members of the Family from 4 to 40, and although technically they did die it was a 'natural' death. What's with the constant overselling of these episodes. Whatever happened to Underpromise & Overdeliver. If Moffat wants to know how to pen an emotional farewell I suggest he goes back and watches the RTD episodes when Rose, Donna & Wilf left the show. See also John Smith just prior to opening the watch and turning back in to the Doctor in Family of Blood. I'll even throw Kylie in - that was more emotional than the Ponds leaving for me. ( Martha's exit - not so much, never took to her ) And if you want to watch something genuinely affecting regarding the death / not death of a character at the end of their run stood on a rooftop then try watching the final episode of Life on Mars and see how it's done.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:46 a.m. CST

    Going back for Amy and Rory

    by Lidless

    I had initially thought this was a plot hole - the fact that they could easily have met up outside of New York. This in itself would not be a problem of crossing time streams as this would be current Amy and Rory's personal time lines. However, once the Doctor has read the last page where Amy tells him what happened, he realises that he has not gone back to fetch them from the past, so that's a no no. I might even hazard a guess that part of him is happy that they have had a good life and died well. The last few episodes have had him worried for their future and bemoaning what has happened to other companions. It seems obvious to me, if only from the book, that yes, River and Amy have interacted since. How much? Irrelevant. But as ever there is a way out if The Moff wants to. Just because you read it doesn't mean it's true. It could be a lie. Perhaps in the Doctor's personal time stream it's best at that time that he does not go back for them yet. To paraphrase the Tardis, it's not want he wanted to read, but it's what he needed to read. The tombstones may be true, they could be a lie, but that's a stretch. On the assumption that it's true, all we know is that Amy and Rory died in New York in the past. As to what happened between them being pulled into the past in New York, and dying years later in New York, is completely up for grabs.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:52 a.m. CST


    by Lidless

    it's not WHAT he wanted to read, but it's what he needed to read. *looks forward to the day of reliable voice activated iPads*

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 6:13 a.m. CST

    @ cosmic_dolphin

    by Octavian

    The build-ups without satisfactory resolution has been the downfall of the entire Moffat era. Time and time again we have had complex, in fact over complex storylines and have been cheated out of a fitting finale. There is a very fine line between being clever and being a smartarse, and Moffat manages to get on the wrong side of that equation time and time again. It is hard not to think Moffat might hit the send button for his latest Who magnum opus with the subject line "Will this do?", with no-one on the receive list with the guts to say no. It says something that many of the (incorrect) fan theories put forward on the Docbacks over the last couple of years have been superior to anything Moffat has come up with. I would be happy to never see either River Song or the Angels ever again. Both have outstayed their welcome. Last night was OK. I didn't find myself twiddling my thumbs as I have with many of the Moffat era tales. Unfair as it might sound it went from a cracking pace to a rushed ending. As for the Statue of Liberty I suppose it was a suitably creepy idea, although in a city of a couple of million, even pre-war, the idea there might be times when nobody is looking at one of the most famous landmarks on the planet seems unlikely. By the way, when no-one is looking at the Angels what do they do? The Macarena? It is a great concept for a villain but it doesn't make much sense given a few seconds thought.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 7:03 a.m. CST


    by david

    I guess those points make sense. Thinking about it, what bothers me are two things: One is that those explanations kind of make sense.... if you really really really really think about it and know the series lore. It's great that Who has a universe all its own but the stories should stand up without a PhD in Nu Whu. Two is the thing we agree on. He spins lots of plates and dazzles for 50 minutes, then its all explained and resolved in five minute flat. The hour-long stand alones must have something to do with that. I still enjoy the show and PVR it every week here in Toronto. Those things just take me out of the show a little bit. Moff can do clockwork stand alones, like the original Angels episode. But since he's been in charge he has taken liberties with the two points above. I did like the last little coda where we go back to seeing Amelia as a girl. Nice way to put her back in the universe and send her on her way with some satisfaction even though we've just seen her death. It was a nice touch. Now we just need my idea for the next Doctor to come true: he and the Master cross-regenerate into one time lord for a series and he's less sympathetic to the situations he finds himself in.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 7:22 a.m. CST

    aramis - re: they'll get tired of hanging around here all day

    by Rebel Scumb

    Yeah I was very confused about that to. I thought river meant for some timey wimey reason the Ponds could never ever leave the cemetary and her and the doctor were quickly running off in the Tardis to leave them behind That whole moment is very weird When Rory first vanished I thought maybe it was the paradox correcting itself and not an angel And your right about the tombstone it should have had both of them

  • That part wasn't blocked very well.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 7:23 a.m. CST

    I wonder if The Angel's Kiss - A Melody Malone Story...

    by dj_bollocks in The Library...?

  • I'm not one to normally nitpick this type of stuff except the whole resolution of the story relies on it. And even then if I'd felt more emotionally engaged I can look past quite a bit. I need to watch this episode again, my feels on it are very mixed.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 7:29 a.m. CST

    I have been thinking...

    by popboy

    if the blue bow tie doctor and the red bow tie meet up and one of them was the master say. would we end up getting a much darker dr. one who was cunning, cleverer, nastier. and at the same time was manic and jumped up and down when he had a something resembling an idea.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 7:30 a.m. CST

    Wouldnt the fixed point just be the writing on the tombstone itself?

    by Rebel Scumb

    Couldn't they just go get Amy and Rory then make the tombstones and put them there? How would the doctor's timeline be crossing itself at that point?

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 7:34 a.m. CST

    doctortom, re: rory as his own grandfather

    by Rebel Scumb

    Aside from the fact that Amy can't have kids I don't think anyone can be their own grandfather If so, then it would create a closed loop of incest where rory's dad would be inbred, making an inbred rory, making a more inbred brian, making a more inbred rory, making an even more inbred brian, making an even more in bred rory, making an even more inbred brian, making an even more in bred rory,making an even more inbred brian, making an even more in bred rory,making an even more inbred brian, making an even more in bred rory,making an even more inbred brian, making an even more in bred rory,making an even more inbred brian, making an even more in bred rory,making an even more inbred brian, making an even more in bred rory,making an even more inbred brian, making an even more in bred rory, into infinite... until eventually both brian and rory can no longer exist as the fetus never survived and then you've got an even bigger paradox on your hands

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 7:38 a.m. CST

    doctortom re: credits

    by Rebel Scumb

    Personally I'm hoping for a completely new version of the song, and completely new visuals as well the season7 version is an improvement of the visuals from before, but I'm still not really a fan of this version of the credits, and 3 years is a pretty good run based on the shows history both old and new, so with the arrival of JLC I'm hoping for something fresh

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 7:41 a.m. CST

    hornersilk, re: River's reaction. I just realized your right

    by Rebel Scumb

    I had completely forgot that River getting to see Amy and Rory again has nothing to do with going back in time to see them in 1930s new york, it's because she is yet to have some of the adventures with them the doctor has already had, or at the very least assumes this to be the case.

  • It seems like the type of thing the master would pull to rile the doctor, and could lead to some very fun back and forth between smiths

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 8:03 a.m. CST

    that is why the bow tie thing is important...

    by popboy

    we have been looking at the master all along and not even realizing it.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 8:12 a.m. CST

    Yippee! Final season of Merlin kicks off this coming weekend...

    by obijuanmartinez

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 8:12 a.m. CST

    what bow-tie thing?

    by Rebel Scumb

    I must have missed something

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 8:29 a.m. CST

    not the greatest story ever told...

    by Greg

    but far from the worst. Personally I enjoyed it. Had me pretty well gripped for the run time, and I didn't scream at the TV at the ending like some on here did. Looking forward to the Christmas episode.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 8:32 a.m. CST

    Hate to say I told you so !

    by Timmid

    There was never any chance that we were going to get any major Timey Wimey tying up of all things Pond in this last episode. For all his over the top grandiose talk Moff hasn't got it in him. He's got a record now of not living up to his own hyping of the show. In a way, in a serious contrast to RTD ( who had his faults) Moffatt lacks any ability to get real emotion out of his characters. He reminds me of Dexter, he understands there are emotions but isn't sure exactly how to show them. One key aspect in this episode was where Rory and Amy throw themselves off the roof in the belief that, in creating a paradox, this wouldn't kill them. Not only was this the biggest stupidest gamble ever but there was no real depth to it either. We hadn't really seen any evidence of the total despair that might lead to something like this. Its almost as if Moff leaves it up to us to imagine how we'd feel in Rory's position because he can't show it. Oh and River should fuck off now. Not least because he's screwing up the original premise . She's now getting maudlin about being old but she's younger here (in theory) than she was in say the Silence in the Library where none of that was on show. Somebody mentioned it above. Moff does Chapter headlines but the content is never as good as the titles he throws out. I'm almost imagining now the fall of the Eleventh to be the Doctor tripping over a loose rug. Very disappointing season

  • Although, I think its unlikely the Doctor will, I thinks its safe to presume that River does(as we dont know exactly where this is in her timeline other than after the Byzantium episode she may well have done so in her "past" & THAT could also be why she seems less affected) & hey--who knows--the Doctor "cheated" his fixed point, so the fact that the Ponds are buried in the graveyard does not rule out the idea that even THAT could be a "cheat". You'll note they purposely did NOT show us the dates they died--we just know their ages at death That said, as much as I love Amy & Rory I think that this was a fitting, sweet & beautiful ending to their time with the Doctor & IF we dont see them again, I can live with that & its probably a better "ending" for them if we dont. As I said in my initial post last night--it tore me up(yes I cried) when they were willing to sacrifice their lives for the other--first Rory on the building & then Amy in the graveyard. I've said before that I'm a sucker for happy endings & I think this gave one to Amy & Rory, & even though the Doctor's initial reaction was so full of pain & grief--as others have said--vortex manipulator--he could always pop in for a visit with the in laws

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:02 a.m. CST

    @rebel scum - The bow-tie thing

    by V'Shael

    Some users have really old televisions, or something. Their colour gets washed out a lot. They see the Doctor sometimes wearing a blue bow-tie and sometimes a red one. They have never ever provided a screengrab to illustrate this, so may be they are just colour blind, and the fault isn't in their choice of television. Either way, everyone else who has looked to see if these rumours of two coloured bow-ties (and thus implying two Doctors) is true, has come back and said they must be smoking crack. Never the less, the rumours continue. Much like the Rani, the duck pond, the third floor, the Amy voting to forget, and the Rory is the Master rumours = they have continued long long past the point where they stopped being funny.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:14 a.m. CST

    As far as the angels being overused...

    by glenn_the_frog

    it's not so much they've appeared too much. 3 stories in the course of 4 seasons (and one cameo) isn't overkill at all. The problem is the first episode they were in was near flawless and extremely memorable. It was slow paced, and a LOT of time was spent on them being creepy, scary, and the entire "don't blink" mantra... because if you looked away for even half a second, you were done, but as long as you could remain visual, they were harmless... and that's why they were so scary, because it was partly your own fault for blinking. In both appearances since then, and especially in this episode, they've just been monsters of the week, in very *fast* paced episodes with a lot going on (even the two parter!) and their defeat was a big explosion thingy... rather than a slow, clever and deliberate trap that uses their own nature against them. Their rule was explained before, so its just up and running... and they're being treated as monsters you can outrun. (Just race down this hallway and make a run for it!) There wasn't *any* drama or tension put into *don't dare look away* this time around... and very little last time as they were treated as neck snapping monsters. This time around they were just there for the time travel ability, more than anything else that was interesting about the angels. They were completely secondary in the story, and so the critters that were easily on their way to being A-list monsters have by default become B-listers.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:16 a.m. CST

    That was epic Doctor Who.

    by Smashing

    Most of the "plot holes" mentioned above are solvable by paying attention to all episodes. Moff has written a sweeping, beautiful goodbye and I cried a lot. River was as always excellent, and when Rory and Amy went I was in pieces. Other issues such as how TSOL can move around NY unseen or unremembered are erased by the high levels of time energy in the area, I guess he parked the Tardis far away when he went back to NY at the end for the last page. I like how Melody was in NY as a kid likely looking for her parents, it tied in nicely, I also like how River got out of prison, clever. I trust Moff with building legend and fully expect to see The Ponds again, maybe it will cause a crack in the universe?

  • I still think it boils down more to the doctor can't visit them *easily* ever again, and he certainly can't take them around on crazy adventures. Yes, he could just go out to Delaware in 1934 (or 1939) and start slowly making his way to New York, and very slowly get back to them (but he was going bonkers after 4 days of slow...) or borrow River's portable time machine... but its been a concern of his since last season that he was going to ruin them or get them killed. But he knows they lived long, natural lives. and they were happy and together, and the farewell was quick, and it does give him the break off he needed, but didn't want. (River doesn't have that problem, obviously... and she might still have a few more adventures to see younger them first... but I don't think we have a whole lot of onscreen River stories left either.) I think the big problem people are having is the tombstone provides a definitive where and when. Which more than just creating a fixed point, to us as viewers seems like well, its easy to find them then! If they'd been sent to a completely unknown impossible to find time and location with no closure, people would accept that as a tragedy the doctor couldn't do anything about easier... but we see a time and place and go *so why doesn't he just visit?* Now, if the doctor thought they were going to have short fast painful lousy deaths because of him... he'd start scheming and making a plan and risk breaking the universe to try and prevent it. But long natural happy lives? Where its more his being unhappy than theirs? He can deal with that. It's a hard goodbye for *him*. Not a completely impossible one to overcome, but hard enough that he knows he's not going to. Which, again, is why I like that his final goodbye is actually a hello.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:26 a.m. CST

    thanks for clarifying v'shael

    by Rebel Scumb

  • That's the one time where Moff really pulled off this one thing in the Flesh and Stone episode where it seemed like an odd continuity thing with the doctor coming back to closed eyed amy and suddenly his jacket was back on. But that was paid off perfectly, but the problem is now every time something that feels a bit off, or there is a continuity error (which happens often enough) or just a bit of sloppy writing everyone assumes there will be some The Big Bangesque explanation of 'wow that was so well set up!!!' Which would be great, but I feel at this point it's an unfair expectation to place on Moffat or the show. He pulled it off once with great aplomb, but there's really no further example of it happening, and plenty of times where people thought it would. That's why I try to stick to the 'simplest answer is usually the right one' approach. Because I do agree that there has been so very minimal payoffs to some big set ups. Season 6 being the biggest culprit A good example being all the speculation about who taught river to fly the tardis, and then in Lets Kill Hitler, we just have Amy come into the tardis with river there and she says 'I flew her, she taught me' or 'the doctor lies' / 'River lies' being the rosetta stone to about 90% of the mysteries The whole business of getting River into the astronaut suit and going through the events leading to the doctors 'death' being such a rushed affair, the wedding, etc.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:34 a.m. CST

    @gotilk: thanks for sharing.

    by threetoesoffury

    i thought it was pretty cool of you to share how Doctor Who hit home with you and connected with your own personal life. I think thats one of the amazing things about the show...its well written, entertaining, filled with geeky time-traveling goodness, but on top of all of that, the show always has strong foundations in emotional connections and relationships between people. I think thats why we uber-who-fans are who we are and why we love it soooo much. Peace n The Doctor is in 3ToF

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:38 a.m. CST

    Really needed to be a two-parter

    by photoboy

    I think my recurring opinion of most episodes this season has been that they're trying to cram too much into single episodes, and I thought the same about last night's episode. They could have saved a lot of time and money if they'd skipped a lot of the extraneous stuff like going back to ancient China to put messages on vases or having all that nonsense with the mob boss. You could get away with that in a two-parter but in the confines of a single episode it's just excess guff that doesn't really add to the plot or story. River Song continues to be unbearably smug and annoying, the worst part being that dying in her first story hasn't stopped her coming back again and again. The Doctor being able to suddenly release regeneration energy to heal anyone whenever he feels like it seems a bit stupid too. I can think of several instances where he could have used that super power in previous stories... The angels themselves weren't much of a benefit to the story either. The Statue of Liberty could have been a fun element if they'd gone a bit further with it, but it seemed like a wasted story element given the short running time. In the end it didn't really do much except stand in the background and do nothing. The whole idea of the angels somehow constructing a building seemed a bit far-fetched too. I thought maybe Moffat was building up to some controlling force behind the angels to explain how they could have created such a complex plan. Finally, how the Ponds were written out made no sense. If the Ponds killing themselves stops the angels, then surely Amy and Rory should have just killed themselves again to contradict the gravestone and cause another paradox? The fact that Amy's name wasn't originally on the gravestone should have been a paradox too. Also, doesn't allowing Amy and Rory to be captured mean all the angels are back in existence in the past and slowly bleeding New York dry? It seems like the Doctor has left his "beloved" companions right at the start of the angels being able to take over the planet... Speaking of Amy going back to be with Rory, why did River contradict the Doctor and encourage her to do it? Beyond setting up Amy to publish River's book it seemed like a bad idea. Maybe Moffat has some master plan to bring them back (he managed to keep the appearance of Jenna Louise Coleman (and I think Alex Kingston) secret so maybe he's got a plan). That said, we get all sorts of crazy conspiracy theories about every season and the actual stories never seem to live up to the speculation...

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:42 a.m. CST

    re: the overuse of angels

    by Rebel Scumb

    Its not the volume of episodes they're in, but the way it's been used. A good example is the episode MIDNIGHT, which is one of my all time favorite Who stories. The monster in that is great, just the repeating voice possessing the woman. Love that stuff, terrifying and very clever But do I want that creature to come back? Probably not, because it was so specific to the nature and style of that episode I think anything else would have diminishing returns. I can see some writer going "you know what would be crazy? Like... 20 of those talking at the same time midnight monsters... in the same episode!!!" And who knows, someone might find a way to do it really well. But I think that is unlikely, best to just leave it alone as a great classic one off. Because part of what made that episode work was not just the monster, but the bottleshow aspect of it. The same with Blink. Blink is amazing, the angels are amazing in it. But the angels aren't the only thing that makes that episode work. It's a huge soup of great ideas that all fit together like a jigsaw puzzle, and it ends up as more than the sum of its parts. It could very easily have been a disaster. All the best ideas walk that tightrope line of almost being terrible, the great ones make it safely across. Blink did that, Moffat's script is pure genius, the directing is perfect, the girl playing Sally is perfect. The angels are great. That episode worked though due to it's uniqueness, it was a 'almost no doctor in this episode' outside the box type episode. and by trying to replicate it, you put it in the box instead of outside of it. What everyone forgets is that was the Boomtown/Love & Monsters/Midnight/The Lodger/Closing Time of it's season. Each season has that one episode, the calm before the storm of the finale, the episode that tests the boundaries of the show's format, and is almost always designed to be shot on the cheap so more money can be put into the finale's budget. Anyways, my point is that simply putting the angels into more episodes, good ones or not is not the key to replicating Blink's success, the key is to come up with more original outside the box episodes Not to make another Blink, but another fresh episode that makes the audience as thrilled as they felt when they first watched Blink. That should be the goal. And it's not to say I'm not for returning monsters, I love the daleks, the cybermen, the Silurians, the master, et al References and creatures from the old show are great. I just think some lend themselves to multiple appearances better than others.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:44 a.m. CST

    I think your probably right Smashing...

    by Rebel Scumb

    about seeing the Ponds again afterall it's no different than Rose coming back in series 4, and in the end of time When Moffat or Smith, or both are in their final season it would make perfect sense to bring back Rory and Amy, and I'm sure they will figure out a way to do so, if not before that.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:45 a.m. CST

    Several moments you might have missed in Angels Take Manhattan (SPOILERS!)

    by threetoesoffury

    1) During the first reveal that the Statue of Liberty is a weaping angel, just before the cutaway to current NY, you can faintly hear the song "Your Love is Lifting Me Higher" and there's a shot of Egon, Venkman, and Ray inside the statue's viewing deck. 2) The big question is 'where in time' did rory/amy end up..several scene's were filmed but chosen not to be added until the dvd release they include: - rory/amy materialize in a warehouse in NY where some thugs are interrogating a main chained to a wall..pull back reveals its donald pleasance saying "you're the duke! you're the duke!! you're a-numa-oneeeeeeee". - rory/amy materialize in a small italian cafe and turn to see a young michael correleone ask a police officer if he can goto the bathroom.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:46 a.m. CST

    well put glenn the frog

    by Rebel Scumb

    both regarding the angels, and the amy rory farewell

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:47 a.m. CST

    I still say the best way to do the Angels from now on

    by HornOrSilk

    Is not to have them as the primary focus of an episode, but a part of the superstructure of the Doctor Who universe. They are out there. They will surprise you. You might be in the middle of a chase with a Dalek behind you and suddenly run into one. Make it so they exist, and their appearance is unexpected and unrelated to the story -- but something which adds to the difficulties in the middle of a story. Turn them to the Doctor who equivalent of a slasher horror villain which will suddenly appear out of nowhere. That is how they should work.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:49 a.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    That's been my main observation as well for season 6 and 7 as well, almost all the stories would have worked better as 2 parters and the thing with doing stuff like the china vase was cute the first few times, but has been overused now, and as you said eats up a lot of time and money

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:50 a.m. CST

    So no... *SPOILERS*

    by tangcameo

    ...scene of Brian finding out the fate of his son and daughter-in-law or meeting his granddaughter? Does Moffat wear fringe on his clothes 'cause he seems to live with a lot of loose threads.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:53 a.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    Yeah, I think RTD understood a lot better how to make use of the characters and their families to make the danger palpable and the hard choices emotionally devastating. Even though I've seen most of seasons 1-4 at least 3 times each, I still get just as emotionally invested every time where as I find with seasons 6 and 7, it's a show I'm watching, that is often entertaining and interesting and surprising, but I don't often feel absorbed or engaged in the same way. Its not that it never happens, but certainly not as much as I'd like to be.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:53 a.m. CST

    If the Angels send people back in time, why not a villain!

    by tangcameo

    Imagine another DW villian battling with The Doctor when the Angels show up and ZAP they send the villian, not the hero or the bystander, back in time. Then the villain starts messing with the past and The Doctor has to figure out a way to get back there and fix whatever the villians doing to mess with the past.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 10:03 a.m. CST

    @rebel I was hoping for a BTTF2 ending for Brian *SPOILERS*

    by tangcameo

    Where he suddenly appears at the one spot where we learn the ultimate fate of Rory and Amy (I'm trying not to be too spoilerish for those simpletons who've chosen to read these before watching the show) just after the goodbyes, saying he got a letter from Rory/Amy from a firm of lawyers who showed up at his door one day (like Blink, or Joe Flaherty at the end of Back To The Future II) explaining what happened and maybe even chronicling the rest of their lives together for him. And that's where Brian would FINALLY meet his granddaughter.

  • We just didnt see it--the visit doesnt mean that she didnt still fall asleep in the garden(after being told some great bedtime tales by the Doctor) to later be taken inside by the Doctor during his "rewind". Since she was a child, she may have thought it to be a dream, or told the various psychiatrists she bit over the years about it & became convinced that it was a dream. As for why she never mentioned it to the Doctor once he DID come back--well, theres a lot of running, and jumping and sexy fish vampires, and Daleks, and Romans, and....STUFF, when they are together-- OR she might have known it would be SPOILERS via River or whatever... I thought Amy's request added a beautiful touch to the ending

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 10:12 a.m. CST

    THAT was the equation.

    by Perigee

    I finally had my Ruk moment on this season. The episode was fine - it was good for what it was, as far as it goes. No tears, though, and I'm not sure why there'd be any; perhaps they shouldn't have added that Happily Ever Afterword if they wanted to keep the pathos. I could deal with most of the holes well enough, and my biggest disappointment, frankly, was that the Statue of Liberty was only a matte shot used twice. It didn't do anything, and looked pretty stupid looming around uselessly a second time. But now, the Ruk moment. You know I've been underwhelmed by this first half season; something has been vaguely unsatisfying about it for me. Somewhere in the comments in this docback, the light came on. The Moff, with all due adoration, simply can not handle one-offs. His grand aspirations outstrip his time constraints. And - honestly - his script editing this season blows donkey dick. Frinstance, all that crap at the beginning of this episode with the detective; it's lovely if you have 90 minutes to tool around with, but it was time that really should have been better spent at the end of this episode dealing with the aftermath. I could care less about gumshoe Joe who I never saw before or will see again, and his only point was to set up a disposable villian and the episode's conceit of the hotel. All of it was covered again later in the episode anyway. We didn't have 90 minutes. So we were robbed at the back end for leisure in the beginning. I started thinking back... and the same situation occurs over and over again throughout the season. The ending robbed and rushed at the end because the story was essentially too long for the episode. We didn't need the Parka Zombies; Amy's wrist-thingie could have been damaged in transit. All the time spent dealing with the ~O~ mouthed goons in the hospital and the concentration on the dumb blue-eyed kid could have been given to the actual bad guy. Did we really need to ride a dinosaur, and argue with goofy robots, when we could have spent that time fleshing out the main villain? Too much story - not enough time. I know that times and entertainment has changed over the years, but, in a way, these episodes would have been far more satisfying if they had been dealt with in an old-school Star Trek way - more verbal exposition and discussion, less actual pointless action. Heck - that's even old-school Who.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 10:18 a.m. CST

    tangcameo that's another good way to use them

    by HornOrSilk

    I think they have potential to be more than they have been, but making them the primary focus of the story is out (for now). There might be one more "primary" story for them -- to figure out where they come from and how they came to exist.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 10:22 a.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    I would be onboard for that. I also liked the suggestion someone had of either Amy and Rory raising young River in NYC Or also the idea of them being zapped back in time but the doctor doesn't know where or when so its much more ambiguous

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 10:30 a.m. CST

    you hit it right on the head perigee

    by Rebel Scumb

    is rory inside a book?' 'how did he get there?' 'what is river doing there??

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 10:31 a.m. CST

    woah weird, the talkback suddenly has spellcheck????

    by Rebel Scumb

    I've never had this before, but I'm getting the red squiggle under misspelled words like in MS office Handy!

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 10:31 a.m. CST

    Fixed points = storytelling nonsense

    by buggerbugger

    Are we really saying that all of the fixed points that existed on (or linked to) Earth in the 200 year period between 1972 to 2172 during the not-supposed-to-have-happened second Dalek invasion of Earth still happened the way they were always supposed to happen while the Daleks were in charge of the planet? Did all of the fixed points that were linked to the "proper" future-history of Earth post-2172 just hang around still being fixed points to things that "never" happened between 1972-2172, waiting for someone to put everything back on the right track again? What about all those other stories where people have altered history? Were they just lucky that they chose periods and planets that didn't involve any of these silly-as-shit fixed points? Whenever a mad scientist threatens to destroy a world, or crazy aliens threaten to invade a planet, the Doctor should just sit back and do nothing because he knows that the fixed points in space-time that are supposed to happen **after** this particular time period **have** to happen the way they're always meant to happen, so Bad Guy X can't really do much in the way of changing things. Exterminate Mankind in 1980? Not an option if there are a bunch of Mankind-centric fixed points in periods later than that. Invade Earth and enslave Mankind in 1810? Kind of silly, knowing that certain events in the middle of those big World War thingies are probably fixed points and they're going to happen no matter your plan for turning the human race into burgers by 1812. Giving birth to VIP Human A, killing VIP Human B, waging War X, signing Treaty Y, curing disease C, inventing machine D... if these things are always meant to happen across time and space, why does anyone even frigging well bother trying to dick around with history? If something as banal as Beige-flavoured Boyfriend's Tombstone has to always happen, then that sets the bar rather low for what constitutes a fixed point, I should think. The Time Lords: "We have forseen a future where the Daleks will become the dominant life-form in the galaxy. But, hey, don't worry, it'll never happen because of these fixed point things that **have** to happen. They can't win, because Timmy Tarrant has to accomplish Fixed Point Event X on Arcturus 3 a couple of months after that..." Who invented fixed points anyway? Dick move.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 10:50 a.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    I could be wrong but I think the fixed points were initially put in by RTD not so much as an idea onto themselves, but just as a way for the doctor to explain to Rose (and thus the audience) why in some episodes they can change things and in others they can't. And it was said that part of what makes a timelord a lord of time is being able to distinguish these from each other. I think given that the show had to work with the previous 26 years of varying levels of internal logic and continuity, and the fairly basic notions that 1960s writers had of time travel logic this was a good move to make as a writing band-aid to a logical conceit of the basic concept of Dr. Who. In regards to the example you give why the doctor can't just rely on the fixed points to prevent any world ending catastrophe from destroying the human race from week to week, I believe the simple answer is that he is part of the events that set that history, such as in the fires of pompeii, where he was always part of the equation. Still it's a bit muddy I agree, but afterall it is just a fun show where the science shouldn't be scrutinized too much. BUT.... Where I think the show is running into trouble with this now is the fixed point thing should be used as a basic, vague band-aid to minor plotholes, and generally mentioned as little as possible. It's most effective the less it is discussed, quantified and explained. When you set rules for how it works (like the written word stuff from last nights episode) you then are stuck with those rules. Moffat and his team aren't just drawing a lot of attention to the Fixed Point stuff, but actually making it the focus of stories, and often the lynch pin to it. That is a very risky gamble, the notion of fixed points is flimsy, and like I said holds up best when it's just operating in the background and left open to audience interpretation. And I think this is why so many people are bothered by last night's equation leading to the Pond's fate. If you make the story about the mechanics of the plot and showing how clever you are as a writer, and not about characters and emotions, then the audience is going to by nature look at all that stuff with a more critical eye, and with ultracomplicated time travel stories it's very very very easy to paint yourself into a corner, especially with pre-established stuff from previous episodes.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 10:56 a.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    Just as a further thought: If you think back to the old show, with the exception of City of Death and Mawdryn undead, there are actually very few if any instances of really timey-wimey based stories. Even in the RTD era, Moffat masterpieces like BLINK & The Girl in the Fireplace aside, there are very few instances where the story really revolves around time travel itself Time travel is mainly just the maguffin so we have an excuse for the doctor and his companion to have an adventure in a strange and bizarre place. There are a few instances, especially in the historical episodes where there is some time travel shinnigans and history altering antics which are fun And I have absolutely no problem with a great cracking mind bogglingly complex time travel caper Love BLINK, love the girl in the fireplace, love the big bang, love the 11th hour, love (for the most part) the whole River song out of order romance. But if you're going to do those kinds of episodes you really need to do them well, and I still would argue they should be the exception and not the rule.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 11:03 a.m. CST

    @rebel scumb

    by buggerbugger

    re: "[The Doctor] is part of the events that set that history, such as in the fires of pompeii, where he was always part of the equation." Ugh, never liked that. Everything is history from a later point in time - and especially so from a time-traveller's POV - so it's akin to saying that the Doctor isn't really a free agent, his travels and involvements are predestined. He's just doing - or not doing - what he's always meant to have done - or not done - from history's POV. Where's the fun in that? Plus, of course, this sort of thing never seems to bother the Daleks, the Master, the Monk, the Sontarans, or anyone else who's ever messed around with the "proper" course of history.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 11:03 a.m. CST

    Good way to get rid of a pair of companions.

    by Royston Lodge

    Better than the fates of Rose Tyler or Donna Noble, anyways. Definitely better than Adric's death.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 11:17 a.m. CST

    Well....we have Red Dwarf back this week!

    by Michael_Jacksons_Ghost

    As for the TATM episode, meh. If they in the future episodes do not mention Brian Williams, and what happens when he finds out about the Ponds...I will be truly ticked off. Also, I believe the Ponds will be back next year, due to River bringing them back.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 11:26 a.m. CST

    The impact of this episode is growing for me

    by Itamar

    Long time reader, first time poster. Just had to sign up after last night. I enjoyed the episode very much on first viewing, but, like Merrick said, it's hitting me harder and harder as the hours go by. I watched the ending again and actually choked up on my second viewing, not the first. This was a momentous episode and, while flawed, was overall a huge success. As for all those complaining about plot holes and the doctor's ability to bend the rules of time in the past...look, this is Doctor Who and it has never ever made much sense if you nitpick. The simple truth is, the show has always been able to explain away whatever it damn well pleased, including the screwdriver saving the day countless times, or Rose coming back after it was stressed that she never EVER could. The simple fact is that IF Karen and Arthur were staying on the show, then the Doctor could have found a way, because he ALWAYS can when it is needed. But they're leaving and so he can't. And if, say, Karen were to decide to come back to the show in 2 years (I know she has promised not to) they would just explain it away with some mumbo jumbo. That's just the nature of the show. It's also part of its magic. As opposed to the BS that Lost creators tried to sell us towards the end, DW really is about the characters and the magic and the ride, not about making any sort of sense. No writer could ever make the ponds' departure foolproof because that is impossible in Doctor Who. So, working with what he had, Moffat did an admirable job. And the Doctor not being able to cross his stream after witnessing the Ponds' tombstone, coupled by the paradox excuse, is damn good enough for me.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 11:28 a.m. CST

    at the end of batman the dark knight rises

    by popboy

    they bury bruce wayne and you see the grave with his name on it. but bruce wayne is not dead. and batman lives on. wayne enterprises was dismantled. and all the profits went to charity. So the grave for rory and amy is a ruse.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 11:31 a.m. CST

    Fixed points in time = arbitrary plot boundaries

    by Bill Clay

    It's hard to build a sense of danger or finality in a time travel story. After all, every time something bad happens, you can just pop in the time machine and fix it! These fixed points are a plot device where the writer of the episode is saying "This really happened! No take-backs!"<p> Of course we'll see Amy and Rory again. Another writer will just find a timey-wimey exception to the rule that will allow another visit with the Ponds (Williams?) someday. After all, we supposedly lost Rose to another dimension forever, and she managed to find her way back.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 11:46 a.m. CST

    Re: "why did River contradict the Doctor?"

    by Bill Clay

    Speaking of Amy going back to be with Rory, why did River contradict the Doctor and encourage her to do it? <p> She wanted her Mom and Dad to be together, no matter what time period it was in.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 11:47 a.m. CST

    The gravestone

    by mullymt

    Here's my thoughts: All we actually know is that the gravestone exists with Amy and Rory's name on it. We don't know that their bodies are actually in it, or that they actually died at those ages. The simplest solution to avoid the paradox? Amy and Rory (sometime after the book is published) have a gravestone built for themselves and plant it in that spot. Paradox averted, the Ponds are free to create their own future.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 11:50 a.m. CST

    The writing....

    by dj_bollocks

    The sign of great writing is the ability for your reader/viewer to suspend belief and go with the ride you take them on. That's my problem with The Moff lately, the devices he's using are not as watertight or thought out as they have been in the past. Now is it possible that he had a better Script Editor during the RTD era who may have called out any bullshit, or is it because now he's the showrunner he's somewhat untouchable ? Dunno... I think the question I would pose to you all to discuss would be with a clean slate, where would you take the show ?

  • Buh bye Amy - you looked hot in the tight red dress on Conan a few days ago - I like em skinny and red headed- she looked cute in that lipstick too

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:03 p.m. CST

    Good episode but...

    by Hellstrom

    I didn't find it as emotional as I thought, I think because it leaves so much open for a return --- hell, didn't River mention at the end that she was going to visit them to drop off the book to create the manuscript?? Its like a Tennant ending: "As an actor I want to do other things, but I love you guys so please don't close the door on me, please, please, I'll come back when the cameo/guest appearance is good!"

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:04 p.m. CST

    The Angels were better used in this than Time of Angels BUT...


    Manhatten was probably the last time they should be used.

  • So,, there in the US they replayed many of Rory & Amy's biggest eps yesterday, concluding with "The Girl Who Waited" in which the following exchange occurs: 31:40 into The Girl Who Waited, Amy says, "I'm now changing that future… every law of time says that shouldn't be possible." The Doctor answers, "Yes, except sometimes knowing your own future is what enables you to change it, especially if you're bloody-minded, contradictory, and completely unpredictable." Rory and the Doctor go on to conclude that if anyone can defeat predestiny it's Amy Of course in last night's ep, it was all about the opposite--knowing your future makes it "fixed" Not that these type of inconsistencies/contradictions are unusual when dealing with the Doctor & time travel, but I flashed on that quote while working out & just though I'd put it out there for my fellow fans

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:22 p.m. CST


    by suicideblondjay

    if the paradox rory and amy create when they jump off the building, erased the building, killed the angels and everything they had done/created, how did that one angel survive and where did it send rory and amy if the paradox erased everything?

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:25 p.m. CST

    Yeah Glenn the Frog puts it Blink you dare not look away


    But their scare factor has been reduced in Manhatten and particularly Time of Angels as people can run from them. One reason why I don't think they should ever be used again. They've been watered down into B movie type villains which isn't good (even though the episode itself weren't too shabby.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:27 p.m. CST

    Not to mention they were shown moving in T.O.Angels.


    I don't recall them moving in this but it was a mistake to show the Angels moving like that.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:33 p.m. CST

    A writer's rationalization

    by Dreamfasting

    What I found interesting about this story is that it wasn't really a story about Amy, Rory, River or the Doctor ... it was a story about Moffat and the act of writing and dealing with your own accumulated canon. A writer, even for a normal tv show or book series is like a time traveller - writing bits of their world's canon all out of order, adding scenes of history and then having to write around them so it makes sense, re-rationalizing moments so the already-written scenes work or just throwing up their hands and allowing paradoxes and inconsitencies to happen. My only quibble with this story is that the paradox should have played out like River's wrist ... Amy and Rory should have been allowed hope, but in the end, the outcome was fated. When they through themselves off the roof, my amateur storytelling/paradox-resolving instinct was telling me that Amy would die in the fall but Rory would miraculously survive but horribly crippled, only to be zapped and spend his life bed-ridden and in pain, waiting for that one last moment with his wife. (on a more personal note, having had a good friend jump to his death long ago, I have a visceral dislike of writing that show sucidal acts as a solution to a problem ... I don't want to imagine that lie, it doesn't make me feel better about anything)

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:34 p.m. CST

    blah ... ignore my bad spelling

    by Dreamfasting

  • Because, again much like the Zygons, they really don't have a lot of range as far as stories go, so you basically get the same kind of story over and over again to diminishing results the more you use them. If they were left alone after Blink they'd still be seen as legendary and truly memorable creations, whereas now they're pretty much JAM (just another monster) as far as the Who baddies pantheon goes. As for the episode itself, I though it was enjoyable enough, and has a few nice moments, but it just didn't have the impact that I had hoped for. Partly because of the diminishing value of the Weeping Angels, and partly because it overplayed its hand in trying so hard to have that 'big moment' that it kept piling them one on top of another during the last few minutes, not giving any of them time enough to breath and make any real impact before another wannabe big moment gets dropped right on top of it. I mean first you get old dying rory and the paradox, then the sacrificial roof scene, then the woo we're alive, then the shock rory loss, then the 'i just blink' departure, then the book epilogue, then the girl who waited, and to me it was all too much in too short a time, and reeked a bit of 'look at me, aren't I clever' writer self indulgence, which ended up drowing out most of the actual drama that should have been there as these characters departed (or in this case, departed, and departed, and departed...). Sometimes less really is more. A less gimmicky, more concise ending would have worked better methinks. Hell, I would have ended it after the roof, and then had the epilogue, but maybe that's just me. Like I said, I still enjoyed the episode well enough overall, it just wasn't all that I hoped it would be. Oh, and someone tell Moffat, more character, less gimmickry please. He's a quality writer, but he seems to be dipping into his same old bag of tricks with only slight variations far too often lately. Hopefully a new companion will give the show a breath of fresh air, and take it in some new and interesting directions.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:44 p.m. CST

    the Ponds' big send-off, with SPOILERS

    by Kathryn Gail

    Dunno, I'll certainly have to watch it a few more times, but I suppose the Ponds' send-off struck me (inappropriately, very subjectively, and with many apologies to other dockbackers and above all to anyone reading who actually worked on the show!!) as giggle-worthy in part because I was so wound up about how emotionally scarring it was scheduled to be (gotilk isn't alone in experiencing the show's many real-life parallels!), so I was bracing myself for something more along the lines of Amy and Rory being zapped to far-flung points of time and space only to learn in some crushingly chilling way that neither one's sacrifice had spared the other a painful early demise. Had I not been utterly distracted by the mechanics of books and statues, "and then they lived happily together until they died of old age" might have made me go all sloppily maudlin in that it's sort universally the simplest wish least easily attained, but instead I was busy squinting at the details when all of a sudden: surprisingly happy ending. "But the Doctor lost his best friends, and Rory died (again, twice)!" True, but. . . despite all last week's assertions that the Doctor and the Ponds really did intend to keep seeing a lot of one another, we know the Ponds kept tilting toward settling down a bit, and we know (and were reminded outright) that the Doctor doesn't like aging or endings, so they were still likely to have drifted apart, and anyway last week the Ponds did get in a good ten years more of life in the 21st century that we just didn't see all the details of. As for the seemingly abrupt decisions about sacrifice, Rory and Amy are no strangers to one another's deaths and have tested their commitment six ways from Sunday, plus doctortom gives a sound explanation up-thread of how Rory has basically been following the logic of paradoxes all along (remember how, the fist time he walked into the TARDIS, he didn't need "bigger on the inside" explained? I'll really miss him!!), so these two of all people are in a position to act quickly. And River's a psychopath with a vortex manipulator!

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:52 p.m. CST

    Did anyone notice... ?

    by Malcolm

    I: When the Doctor and Amy arrive in 1938 in Julius Grayle's mansion and the Doctor does "final checks" of his appearance in the reflection of a metal plaque, I paused it and the read the plaque... Type 40 1 2 Mk VII And then a whole string of fields in a form that were blank accept for a nod to Rolls Royce in Crewe, England. The other fields included NATO storage code, Weight, Storage code (it's all getting a bit fuzzy in memory now). Assuming this was just a bit of silliness from the prop department, the wracking of the focus in that shot to give viewers a brief but clear view of the writing on the plaque was interesting. II: When the Doctor, Amy and River arrive at Winter Quay, we see River in the car but when the gang are running towards the building and through the doors, River is nowhere to be seen until they emerge from the elevator upstairs. Guessing this was due to the exteriors being shot in NYC and the interiors in Wales and the production not having the budget to fly Alex Kingston out to NYC... or was River up to some time jumping shenanigans? Misc. thoughts: The Statue of Liberty as weeping angel just seemed like a really silly gimmick. As others have pointed out, someone would have noticed her missing and stomping around NYC (and having noticed her, would have frozen her on the spot). There's also all the SoL merchandise that would be turning into angels ("that which holds the image of an angel, becomes itself an angel") and all the tourists who stare at her ("the eyes are not the windows of the soul, they are the doors. Beware what may enter there"). There's also the fact that in Blink, Sally Sparrow has taken photographs of the angels and included those photos in the packet she gives to the Doctor at the end of the episode... so the Doctor has been carrying around angels in potentia in that packet. Also in the 2-parter adventure of the Crash of the Byzantium, we have angels en masse who would end up in each other's line of sight... But I'm willing to forgive such plot holes if the overall story is compelling and in the Pond's farewell, I'm afraid I found the story less than compelling... and so the plot holes turn into yawning chasms. I agree with others here that the story seemed rush and the ending too brief and arbitrary and lacked the emotion of previous partings of the way in Doctor Who. The fate of the Ponds could have been easily guessed from the moment we learn the Weeping Angels were back. On Looper: Some one mentioned Rian Johnson's Looper above, I saw it opening day and enjoyed it except for the moment in the diner between old and new Joe's with the cringe inducing lapse in grammar of "less letters" that jarred my suspension of disbelief momentarily.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:52 p.m. CST

    who ever decided

    by popboy

    to over hype season 7, should be shot!

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:53 p.m. CST

    Octavian - what the Angels do when nobody's watching

    by DoctorTom

    They go shopping. After all, they're keeping all those people in the building without letting them out - somebody's got to pick up the groceries.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 12:56 p.m. CST

    Did anyone mention my Sherlock nod ?

    by dj_bollocks

    China 221 BC ?

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 1:03 p.m. CST

    Cherubs: yay or nay?

    by Malcolm

    I also found the inclusion of cherubs into the Weeping Angels mythos to be diluting. It just seems like low hanging fruit to turn cherubs into malevolent proto angels... I much prefer the mystery and purity of not really knowing how they reproduce (aside from the "that which holds the image of an angel, becomes itself an angel" bit in the Crash of the Byzantium episodes). There's a purity to keeping the angels as stone statues of angels and not getting silly with the Statue of Liberty and other bronzes.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 1:13 p.m. CST

    Thanks for the tip dj_bollocks

    by Malcolm

    Checked out the BBC clip and was happy to hear that Madam Vastra and Jenny will be making a return in the Christmas special!

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 1:26 p.m. CST

    Angels angels angels (SPOILERS)

    by Kathryn Gail

    I don't think the weeping angels are overdone in terms of screen time, I think they're overdone in terms of random stuff added on to the original concept. They were great in Blink not only because the story was so well constructed, but because their straightforwardness was so terrifyingly absolute: they were always hungry, you would definitely end up whoknowswhen if they touched you, and you could understand intellectually how to avoid them but could never physically keep it up (so fear of inadequacy and loss of control as well as of loss of identity). There was no good reason to add much else, other than to fill up screen time with explanations! I was initially thrilled to see them back in Season 6 (great detail about starvation making them look weathered), but then both there and in last night's episode. . . they're eating, they're not eating but just snapping necks, they're farming, they're grabbing people without sending them anywhere, they're in of all places the open-eye-filled 'city that never sleeps,' they're moving around in groups despite the risk of quantum-locking one another, they're breeding cherubs that make silly noises, sometimes they put the lights right out and you're toast but sometimes you can stand there looking around having a discussion. . . I'm not bored of their look or concept and I'd love to see them back, just not, as a number of other docbackers have pointed out, so watered down. They're great for pure cause and effect (and look and atmosphere), not for making characters stand around nitpicking over their M.O. (haha--that's the fans' job, not the protagonists'!) (if this keeps on, we'll have to move the docback to some place where we can just virtually run up an down corridors not using guns, while the cast and crew stand around debating continuity and thinking up HATs). And. . . stone is pretty brittle. . . I'd buy a line about their being unbreakable, but we DO see them weather, so I'd like for someone to go on and SAY THE LINE, possibly after trying to whack that stone arm with a torchier lamp or something (if you're considering breaking your wife's wrist in any case).

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 1:29 p.m. CST

    I guess one of my HAT's was half right

    by Cletus1974

    So the shot of Amy waiting on the suitcase for the Doctor in the Big Bang wasn't a dream.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 1:33 p.m. CST

    The tombstone, and Amy and Rory being back in time

    by DoctorTom

    First off, the tombstone. I caught the end of the show again on a late repeat last night. They actually did pan down far enough the first time. Before the Angel sends Rory back, his name's on the tombstone but nothing else. After he's sent back, suddenly the tombstone also says Age 82. So, his age appearing on that was just like Amy's name and age appearing. It still doesn't explain why Rory's name was still on a tombstone, maybe it was a fixed point that he'd be dying (like in The Waters of Mars - he's dying but the details how had changed a bit), or it was a leftover thing from when the timeline got changed a bit, like when Rory's ring was left after he disappeared in the crack (or the photo of him as a centurion). As for the Doctor getting in touch and possibly adventuring with them, it's easy-peasy. The tombstone only lists ages and not dates, so if he wanted he could go have them go around at different times, or move them to a better time if they didn't like the one they were at (so, it's possible the Doctor ends up taking them to young Melody if they don't find her themselves). Of course, the writing materializing on the tombstones right when they're sent back might be an indication of the fixed point in time (in conjunction with the book). Even if the Doctor doesn't visit them, he can talk with them at any time he wants, and vice versa - they have souped up cellphones where they can call the TARDIS (and the Doctor can figure out where they are in time and space through the cellphones). It does leave the option open to bring them back in a story at some point.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 1:34 p.m. CST

    @malckwan, @dj_bollocks: well spotted

    by Kathryn Gail

    221B Baker Street, it's SO OBVIOUS once someone points it out! (Then I googled it and it's also the official beginning year of the Qin Dynasty, for what that's worth.) And I was wondering what clever things that 'final checks' plaque said, but missed it twice over and forgot to ask.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 1:38 p.m. CST

    tangcameo - I like your ending

    by DoctorTom

    I can see why they went with the ending they did, tying in with the book and all that, but it would have been nice to see Brian and resolve that. Of course, Moffat hasn't been big on handling extended family (not counting River) - we only saw Amy's parents in part of one episode, and Rory's dad in only two stories, both by Chibnall. That said, there's always the possibility of another story with the Ponds, and I could see it starting with the Doctor telling Brian what's happened (if Rory and Amy don't write him to tell him) and the Doctor takes him back in time to see his son after he's set up in the past so that Brian can get closure on it, at least. I could see Brian getting a letter in his present time, after that meeting, from Rory with more details, and possibly with River. I do think Brian deserves to know he has a granddaughter, and that she's married to the Doctor.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 1:40 p.m. CST

    Popboy - Rory the Auton

    by DoctorTom

    He was only an auton pre-Big Bang 2. When the Doctor rebooted the universe in The Big Bang, he wasn't plastic any more (though he remembers being plastic sometimes). Despite jokes I made earlier, I don't think River has part plastic DNA.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 1:51 p.m. CST

    Stegman84- I'd disagree with you on the Zygons

    by DoctorTom

    We actually don't know the range that they can have in a story since there was only the one. Yes, there's the party trick of borrowing other people's shapes and that could get played out if they showed up frequently, but that doesn't mean they can't be developed in other ways in the future. Even with the shapeshifting bit, it might be fun to have a story with 2 races that can borrow shapes at cross-purposes (say, the Zygons and the Rutans), and nobody knowing which side anybody's on. It's better than an us vs. them style thing with shapeshifting, since with 3 sides it's all up in the air. Of course, with perception filters running amok in the series, you could probably have practically any sufficiently advanced race do the trick. But, I can see your point - if they're brought back (in more than the nod to offscreen action we had last week) it would probably be better to have more than just them in the story, just as if the Weeping Angels show up again they shouldn't be the sole focus. I like the suggestions made to just have the Weeping Angels pop up in someone else's adventure to be as much a game changer as anything else. I'd agree with Rebel Scumb that there's probably one good main story left for the Angels that gets into their origin. I think there'd be more opportunities for the Zygons, though. I'm half surprised that RTD didn't bring them back in a story with tie ins to global warming.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 1:55 p.m. CST

    Actually, Moffat set a record for companion deaths with this story

    by DoctorTom

    Rory dies 3 times (twice by old age) and Amy dies twice (once by old age). Unfortunately, Rory didn't win the South Park Kenny Memorial Trophy for Most Deaths because he just couldn't keep up with all the deaths Captain Jack racked up in Torchwood and on Who.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 1:57 p.m. CST

    @malckwan, def nay on the cherubs

    by Kathryn Gail

    They were one of the things that completely undermined the Amy/Rory pathos for me last night: How can a quantum-locked creature rear children? Are the offspring like reptiles, full of genetic rather than learned survival skills? How do the parents even. . . I guess really really fast in the pitch dark, like right there in the basement, where they sent Rory (ew, TMI). What if someone turns on the lights or the subway train goes by, will there someday be an archaeological excavation of old tunnels or basements where they mysteriously find pornographic sculpture, will Dr. Song be leading that expedition, will there be statues of other bodily functions, somebody please shut my brain off now so I can watch the show. . . ridiculously distracting. They're supposed to be an ancient species that's completely counterintuitive to humans, so I like the 'image of an angel' mode of reproduction much better. And to plagiarize myself from a week or two back, it would make a great potential-end-of-the-world story, when everyone's Statue of Liberty t-shirts, sno-globes and snapshots start rampaging. . .

  • And I came away thinking much the same as I have always thought. Namely, I really like Colin Baker's brash, prickly Doctor, and that most of the time Baker delivers the goods, even when given the worst of lines and the weakest of scripts. He still stands up as the most under-rated Doctor to me, and he's still amongst my favourite Doctors. I still think he had more bad luck than anything else, and everything that went wrong with the show at the time had nothing to do with him, yet he was scapegoated by everyone, from Michael Grade who was doing Colin's ex-wife at the time (so wasn't exactly impartial), to the BBC who wanted to kill the show and use the money elsewhere, to the scheduling and running time format changes thust on the show, to Eric Saward's spiteful attacks despite the fact that he was ultimately responsible for all the fucking scripts written in Colin's era in the first place, and JNT basically leaving him hanging out to dry. No one wanted to take any responsibility for their own contributions to any problems, or admit to their personal axe grinding, so it was all 'just blame Colin' from most quarters, which the press also ran with, and sadly, so did too many easily led fans at the time once the knives came out. Hell, people even blamed the infamous outfit on Baker, when he had no say in the costume at all. Just sheer idiocy. The fact that Colin Baker has never blamed the fans, or turned on the show or the character in the years since, or even when he was being blamed for everything under the sun and out of his control as a hired actor speaks volumes on just what a class act the guy is. I always feel like I need to defend the guy, because regardless of whether you like his Doctor and his era or not, the guy really did geta raw fucking deal, and all of it through no fault of his own. But anyway, skipping ahead to the final Davison season end story The Twin Dilemma, which to me isn't anywhere near as bad as it is often made out to be, despite the truly horrible acting of womulus and wemus and some questionable effects work. The latter of which never really bothers me too much personally, at least in most cases, I'm not blind to it, I just don't care...I mean Who was never about the effects, they were always a functionary of story and character, and some work better than others in that regard. I mean, sure, the story is rather mediocre, but I liked seeing a regeneration go bad, still do, it was just a really nad idea to have that one story, then end the show for almost a year, leaving that as people's only impression of the new Doctor. Plus ending it on a slice of dialogue like "I am the Doctor, whether you like it or not" again just seemed like a deliberate attempt at audience provocation, and a really misjudged one at that, especially for a show that would then go off the air for most of the year. But I'll still take this, or the even more reviled Timelash, over anything from Sylvester McCoy's first season, and likewise there are stories just as bad, or worse, in most other Doctor eras, so I always feel like the rampant fan hate on these two is a bit overblown and out of proportion really. Mediocre, sure, don't like them, fair enough, but worst ever, hardly. My view anyhow. Any way you cut it though, still not the best start a new Doctor could have, although it could be worse, it could be Time and the Rani... On to Baker's first full season, and I actually think this season stands up quite well, and to me it is pretty much on par with any season during the JNT run. The only thing that really holds it back is that there are no out and out classics (in my opinion) but even so, Attack of the Cybermen is a pretty damn good kick off. Yes the Cryons are a bit, well, odd, but again, I always kind of liked that kind of thing, even when it didn't 100% work, and there are nits to pick, but overall I still really like this one a lot. Lytton is great to see again, I enjoy the late, great Brian Glover's none too bright sidekick, and have no problem with how far Colin's Doctor is willing to go when threatened. Then we have Vengeance on Varos, my favourite Colin Baker story, and one that still stands up quite well to me. I don't know if it is a good introduction to Colin's Doctor necessarily, but it is a good story, just so long as you don't mind an orwellian pastiche, and aren't put off by darker themed Who. Sure, Sean's son is a bit pants, and the less said about the nappy wearing cannibals the better, but most of the cast are pretty good in this, and Sil is the first truly memorable new monster introduced into Who in quite a long time. The Mark of the Rani is a nice little hostorical, and the only thing that Pip and Jane Baker even wrote for Who that I'd classify as good. Everyone seems to be having a good time, especially Ainley as The Master, Peri is treated better in this than most, and it never wears out its welcome. As with everything from the JNT era, there are nits that could be picked, certainly, but all in all its a solid show. The Two Doctors is a bit padded, sure, and there are a couple of largely useless characters that seem to be there mainly to help that padding out, and yes, the Sontaran costumes and masks have seen better days, but Troughton is wonderful, Baker plays off him superbly in the scenes they do share, and both companions have enough to do as well. Plus Servalan from Blake's 7 as a bonus. Not one of Robert Holmes classics, but a rather fun romp all the same. Timelash is utterly reviled by most, but as I've said before, despite all of it's many problems (and it does have some serious problems) I just find most of it rather fun, and that always carries me through. Plus once again Baker is in great form regardless of what he has to work with at any given time. Revelation of the Daleks is a somewhat frustrating 'almost' for me. There's some really good stuff here, but it is always undermined by a pair of truly awful performances (even by Who standards) that just drag everything down whenever they are on screen. If it wasn't for those two performances, I'd enjoy this story a lot more than I actually do. But because of Alexei Sayle and Jenny Tomasin's wildly over the top antics, it all rather falls apart every time either of them show up on screen, the pair representing the acting equivalent of photo-bombers. I still don't mind this one, but I always feel like I'd like it so much more if it wasn't for those two. So anyway, to me the first four stories in Colin's first full season were all good ones, Timelash is hated vy most but liked by me, and Revelation is okay (though most like it a lot more than I do). That's actually a pretty solid run in my book, and certainly not something representative of Worst Who Ever tm. As for Trial of a Timelord, I personally find that season wildly and frustratingly inconsistent. Overall I like the first story (Robert Holmes The Mysterious Planet), quite like the second (Philip 'Varos' Martin's Mindwarp), find the third exceedingly mediocre (Pip & Jane Baker's Terror of the Vervoids) and love the first episode of The Ultimate Foe (Robert Holmes by way of Eric Saward) and hate the second episode where everything decends into pantomime (Pip and Jane Baker again). The trial framing segments vary wildly, grow a bit tiresome, and forces Baker's Doctor to deliver some awful dialogue at times, while other parts of the stories are never fully addressed or given proper closure or explanation to. There's some good stuff in this season, but a whole lot of chaff too, and overall I far enjoy Baker's first full season, and by a pretty wide margin. I'd also say, even though Baker was devastated by being sacked from the show, I think in the long run he was probably luckier for it, as if you look at what hit screens in McCoy's first season, you've got to wonder if that is about the level of what another Baker season would have landed at. And to me McCoy's first season is without a doubt the lowpoint of classic Who. Luckily for McCoy things got a hell of a lot better for him in the following seasons. Anyone still awake, or stupid enough to have read any of that? No? Didn't think so. For the TLDR crowd, I like Colin Baker, think he was harsh done by, and actually rate his first season quite highly. Or, you know, the above...

  • I agree with your comments. Maybe the Angels' ultimate plan, though, HAD been to turn the Statue of Liberty into an Angel, have all the images of the Statue become angels and climb into the minds of all the people looking at them. That might be one way that the Angels propagate. (We don't know if Angels produced that way might start as cherubs. Given that they get quantum locked by other Angels looking at them, it seems hard for there to be any normal type procreation to make new angels. So, the comment about young Angels might be referring to freshly-minted Angels. This could lead to a Planet of the Angels. Just another side thought on creating Angels. I don't know how much energy the Angels get from the person when they actually die versus when they just live in the past. I would think though that if you have a battery farm setup and you wanted to make more angels, one thing you could do is to, just before one of their feedstock dies, have them look into the eyes of an Angel and have an Angel be born from them as part of their death.

  • I mean why can't he ever see The Ponds again, exactly. The reasoning for that just didn't seem to measure up to me. I mean even putting aside the old 'can't cross over fixed point in time/his own timeline' malarky, which is not only a rule that has been broken by The Doctor on any number of occasions, it is something that he has actually done as a central plot device previously. But even if you take that as read, what exactly is the issue here? That they eventualy die when they are old and gray, and so they must always eventually die. Well, yeah, if that is the case, so what? Even if you say that they can't go on adventures, because the risk of them getting hurt and creating a paradox is too great, why would that stop The Doctor from visiting them or even just checking up on them? Even if only to have a proper goodbye, and/or check to see that they really were okay. But he can't travel back to where they are, he said so, I hear you say. Yes, but why would that even be a problem in the first place? If that specific time was locked off to him, then why not simply show up a year or a few years later instead? Or if it was a location that was now blocked to Tardis travel, then land one state over and catch a bus. I mean maybe I missed something, but it just doesn't seem like an idea that holds any water, really. Or if it does, someone explain it to me, because I clearly missed some vital bit of info along the way.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 2:35 p.m. CST

    PS. I called it :)

    by Dreamfasting

    My google-fu is too weak today, but somewhere in the archives of this site is a post I made predicting that the farewell would involve Rory getting zapped back in time and Amy having to let herself get touched to be with him. So I just wanted to give myself a pat on the back for deciphering the mind of Moffat for once.

  • I guess the only point I really had was that when you do something that makes a huge impact to begin with, any time you try to revisit that same well, you run a very real risk of diminishing returns. And perhaps sometimes, on rare occasions, and with the benefit of hindsight, some things might have been better off left alone, at least in terms of their overall legacy and impact. Now of course where my argument clearly falls down is the fact that you never know whether a revisitation is going to be worthwhile or not until you actually bite the bullet and give it a shot, so if a writer thinks they have a good enough idea then they pretty much have to give it a shot, but I do still think the more familiar a monster becomes over time, the harder it is to have any sort of real impact, and the more you run the risk of an audience getting sick of something they may have once loved. But again, at the end of the day it's pretty much just wild speculation and fancy on my part, and the kind of question that doesn't have any definitive answers anyhow. I was more just musing out loud, I suppose.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 3:24 p.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    Yeah your right about the too many new rules added, when absolutely no new rules were needed. It was one of the most counter productive things they could have done

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 3:27 p.m. CST

    Also, the ponds were around longer than Rose, Martha or Donna, yet...

    by Rebel Scumb

    their exit feels the least affecting (to me anyways), where as by contrast, Donna's fate at the end of series 4, even though she was just in that one series as the main companion, and prior to that I absolutely loathed her in the xmas special, just absolutely destroys me every time I watch it And I liked amy and rory, but after their 'death' I just feel like 'well... I guess they're gone now. oh well'

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 3:36 p.m. CST

    Here's a Cyber Hug for The Moff and gotilk!

    by wtriker1701

    You both could need it right now, I guess.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 3:41 p.m. CST

    @patrickstewartsaweverything & @doctortom : angel reproduction

    by Malcolm

    In the very first appearance of the angels, the Doctor calls them "the lonely assassins", if memory servers... so that would seem to preclude sexual reproduction given the risk of quantum locking (though I suppose a case could be made for T-shirts that say "Weeping Angels do it in the dark" or "Weeping Angels do it with the lights off") I really miss the poetry of that mad man's book on the Weeping Angels from the adventures of the Crash of the Byzantium... especially this bit : "what if we had ideas that could think for themselves? what if one day our dreams no longer needed us? when these things occur and are held to be true, the time will be upon us, the time of angels" It just conjures up such lovely images... kinda meta in a way... between an author and his/her creations. It was because of that and the brilliant Blink that I had such high hopes for the Ponds' parting of the ways and why I feel SO disappointed with it.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 3:58 p.m. CST


    by paineywoo

    Does anybody know why they reshot the scene with Amy & Rory when they wake up from the paradox in the grave yard? Karen is wearing the ginger wig from Pond Life, as she had her hair cut after filming Who - Arthur's hair is also different. They seem to have made their hair wet as well to hide it (their hair isn't wet in the next scene). I'm thinking they must of added some dialogue as it didn't make sense in the edit...this is also where the Doctor says he can't go back to New York again. Would love to know what happened - watch again and it's obvious!

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 4:03 p.m. CST

    The Doctor and Paradox

    by maxwello

    Has everybody here forgotten the first rule of travelling with the Doctor? THE DOCTOR LIES. I don't believe the Doctor couldn't find a way to get to them. I just think he believes this lie is the least hurtful way to accomplish something theyh've all been thinking about. They've made it pretty clear over the last few episodes that the Ponds were in an awkward love/hate relationship with the interuptions the Doctor caused in their lives. I think the Doctor's assertions that he couldn't cross his own timestream may have been a way to end the relationship that all parties know if causing problems, without having the Ponds feel "dumped". That way, the Ponds get to let their lives be the focus of their lives, and he doesn't have to watch them fade away while he remains ageless. Nobody has to defend their reasons for wanting out, and overstating the negative parts of the relationship doesn't have to sully the memory of the positive parts. Human's can never be more than a "summer fling" for the Doctor. His life always goes on.

  • Or is this another 'don't mention the war...' type scenario?

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 4:22 p.m. CST

    An altertative ending they could have gone with

    by Rebel Scumb

    Rory and Amy jump off the roof, the paradox destroys the angels, and part of the reason the Ponds due this is to free all the poor souls who are stuck there (ya know, heroism and saving innocent victims, novel concept) Then the doctor and River end up back outside of the paradox in present day and rory and amy are just gone, their ultimate fate left ambiguous.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 4:23 p.m. CST

    'alternative' is what I meant to type

    by Rebel Scumb

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 4:25 p.m. CST

    ...and another thing...

    by Malcolm

    Why did Julius Grayle have a basement full of cherubs when he feared the retribution of the angels from his torturing of the one he has in captivity?

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 4:29 p.m. CST

    So was the egg reference "hardboiled?"

    by Cletus1974

    As in hardboiled p.i.?

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 4:47 p.m. CST

    maxwello I think hits one of the points I made somewhere

    by HornOrSilk

    The Doctor doesn't like goodbyes. That is why he can't go back. He knows it is time for goodbye. This was an easy way to do it without saying goodbye. He throws away the ending of books because he wants things to continue. He left Amy and Rory in such a way it is like throwing away the last page. He knows he can go back -- but it is now limited to what he can do with them. I think the paradox, in a way, makes Amy and Rory like Jack was for the TARDIS. It's not been said, but I think at least the Doctor fears this is the case. So he won't try to find out. He would rather have the open chance to be with them sometime than to entirely end all chances.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 4:54 p.m. CST

    Egg reference "timelines are too scrambled"

    by Cletus1974

    It's a bit of a reach.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:01 p.m. CST

    A REAL paradox: I liked the episode, but no longer like the show

    by The Keminrun

    Like the title says, I liked the episode on its own, I thought it was a good (albeit predictable) way to send off the Ponds, I love River, but Moff has shown once and for all that he cares nothing for continuity. And I can't invest emotionally in a show where the producers feel free to ignore both the show's past and basic rules of logic just to tell one episode's story. I may lay out all of my problems with the show later, but they boil down to these: 1) The conceit that reading about the future locks it into place. How could reading about a future event possibly lock it in. Writing is one of the most unreliable forms of recording history. People record things how they perceive them, not how they actually are. Or they lie. The foolishness with the wrist breaking could easily have been avoided like this: "River, Amy read to me that I have to break your wrist, but I don't really have to, just write in your book that I did (and don't mention this conversation)." The Doctor lies (Rule #1!), so why can't River lie in her novelization of what happened? By logical extension of that absurd notion, if the Doctor read a future premature obituary of someone who wasn't really dying (Mark Twain, for example, had 2 separate premature obituaries), he would have to make sure that person actually died in order to stop a paradox for occurring! (It was read, so it must be a fixed point in time!) And yet in season 6 the Doctor read about his own death and still changed that outcome without any problem. Greenlighting half-assed notions like this which do not fit in with the show's canon show a disrespect for the audience, many of whom have a deep respect for the show's history. Most of the HATs on this forum are better thought out that this! 2) No consistency in how the angel's actually work. Blink tells us that they become quantum locked when they are seen. Is that when they themselves think/know that they are seen or when the universe itself knows that they are being seen? We don't know, but it's apparently not voluntary, since they would otherwise not choose to stay frozen at the end to protect them from each other. Time of Angels shows one moving when it suspects that Amy can not see. How? Is it quantum locked or not? If it can't be seen, why does it look like a statue? They are only supposed to change to that form when they become locked. If it can be seen, how come it's not quantum locked? Plus we have the new idea of "whatever carries the image of an angel is an angel itself". Now in TATM we have the Statue of Liberty being a Weeping Angel?! WTF? We know that Lady Liberty is hollow and was constructed by humans. We also know that Angels are not statues come to life: they are living beings that look like statues. Are all Angels hollow with staircases inside of them? We know that they're not, since we've seen them worn down. How does it make ANY sense to have the Statue of Liberty be a Weeping Angel. And as has been mentioned, even if she WAS an Angel, there is no way that she would not be permanently quantum locked, since there is always SOMEONE looking at her. And of course, if she was an angel, then the millions of angels coming out of the millions of pictures of the statue would have sent the entire human race back in time years ago. Other inconsistencies: The Angel that grabbed River was too weak to send her back in time? But they feed on the energy created by doing that. How does a hungry Angel feed if it can't produce food when it gets too weak? They gave up completely on the idea of angels covering their faces so they don't quantum lock each other. That was the whole punchline of Blink, but in every story since, they uncover their eyes and put on their angry faces and stare at each other ALL THE TIME. Saying that they can move in the dark is a cop out too, since that implies that the 4 angels from Blink only had to wait until nightfall to unlock themselves and continue zapping people into the past. So not only does Moff not respect the show's past, he doesn't even respect his own past! He changes the rules to fit his current whims instead of respecting the boundaries already laid down. That's lazy writing and it's utterly disrespectful of the fans. I can't allow myself to care about something which the creators themselves care so little about. It's a shame, since this show has the potential to be monumentally great, but I fear it never will be. I got into Who because of Sherlock, but Who has made me VERY wary of what Moff will try to pull over on the audience when he finally brings Sherlock back.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:02 p.m. CST

    Rory & Amy on the Hilltop = Fixed Point

    by Michael_Jacksons_Ghost

    Since the Doctor, and Amy viewed the older Amy & Rory on the hilltop, that would mean it has to happen....correct?! If so, I am guessing the tombstone is a lie, which is why River knew Amy would end up in the past with Rory, and that is why River wasn't upset with her parents sucked into the past. I am willing to bet that she went back to 1938, resued them, and brought them back to the present time. The both of them would live out in the countryside, where they could still be in the present time, and age. So, the Doctor won't see them get older, except for the one time on the hillside.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:04 p.m. CST

    @stegman84 - Ponds in Wales

    by The Keminrun

    I was going to mention that, too, but forgot. How could reading about something that will happen in the future possibly trump something which has been seen happening in the future? The Doctor saw Rory and Amy living in Wales in their future! How is that not fixed in time?

  • I must admit the episode with the Angels in those caves did kind of irk me since it kind of retconned the Angels (couldn't they have just stranded their victims in an earlier timeline on the same planet, marooned for life? instead of this need to snap necks?). But with Doctor Who it's like that story game, best described in Stephen King's novel 'Misery', called 'Can You' where a group of kids tell an adventure story and each kid has 1 minute to come up with the next part of the story, make up their own cliff hanger and hand it off to the next person who has to come up with a decent solution to the last person's cliffhanger - and it doesn't have to be perfect, it just has to be credible or even good, to satisfy one's suspension of disbelief. That's what I think of DW. There ARE some episodes of Moffat's that really TWANGED my suspension of disbelief and they seemed to coincide with the filming of Sherlock, as if everyone was spread a bit too thin then to tell a decent story.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:34 p.m. CST

    Technical question about how the Angels are actually made for the show

    by Rebel Scumb

    Does anyone know how the angels are actually realized for the show by the production team? I've been trying figure this out, and strangely there's no Dr. Who confidential for BLINK. I can't imagine they make hundreds of different foam statues for all the different moves the angels make, but if they're all CGI it's really seamlessly done THe only other option i could think of is that somehow that is an actor in makeup/costume standing very still, but seems like there'd be some giveaways to that onscreen if that were the case well either way, story issues aside, the angels have always managed to confound me as a special effect, and that's something very very very few FX in movies and shows can do.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:38 p.m. CST

    keminrun you missed a bit in the show

    by HornOrSilk

    They said the Angels took over statues, showing that they can (I guess given a certain level of energy and power) turn statues into versions of themselves. We know they can turn humans into angels, so the idea that they can change things into their own is not too surprising.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:38 p.m. CST

    The Ponds in Wales was already shown not being a fixed point

    by HornOrSilk

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:38 p.m. CST

    Unecessary cruelty this season

    by Rebel Scumb

    Is it just me or does it feel like there have been some needlessly mean spirited moments in Dr Who this season? The show has always had darker stuff in it, but some examples that come to mind: -bad guys kills the nice dinosaur in DoaS -The doctor killing solomon (even though he did have it coming -Rory's poor dad set up as such a nice guy, then the doctor loses his son in the next episode and doesn't bother to even let him know I dunno, just seems like there is some stuff this year that leaves a bad flavor in my mouth the only one last year that bothered me is the doctor killing Flesh Amy in the almost people, which people in the docbacks have argued is not a murder, but I've watched that episode a few times and it most definitely is, the doctor even says 'I'm sorry, especially given what we've just learned about the flesh' I don't need the doctor to be some squeaky clean do gooder, nor do I want the badguys to have no teeth on the show, but the examples I gave above just feel like the writers sort of abusing the tone of the show, and going for cheap tears at the expense of the audience

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:40 p.m. CST

    cruelty cont'd

    by Rebel Scumb

    also in last nights episode, a good example is the doctor not only not making any attempt to save all the people in the farm but at the end after amy and rory are gone just leaving that angel behind in NYC to continue to victimize people.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:42 p.m. CST

    @rebel scumb I've seen it somewhere even if it's not DW Conf

    by Kathryn Gail

    It was on SOME special or short or extra if no DW Confidentail. I don't know about scenes with lots of angels--I assume that's CGI?--but for the main ones, it's dancers in rather burdensome stiff costumes and masks, with arms an exposed bits of skin painted. Looks like incredibly laborious work, really hell if you have a mosquito bite or a coffee addiction.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:44 p.m. CST

    oops, typos

    by Kathryn Gail

    if not DW Confidential," I mean; "arms and exposed bits of skin

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:48 p.m. CST

    I think moffat has real suprise up his sleeve...

    by popboy

    regarding the master. and I think its the ganger dr.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:50 p.m. CST


    by Carmen A

    I'm not familiar much at all with the old Doctor Who, and I loved your in-depth post above. I've only seen a few episodes of Colin Baker era, and you made me want to go hunt some more down. Great stuff. I'd read more of whatever you want to write about Who. You have a blog or something you collect your writings on Who? I think one of the best things you hit on is that the effects in Who were never supposed to be top notch, and for that reason the writing had to stand out. Nowadays the opposite is true, which is sad.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 5:58 p.m. CST

    @ hornorsilk - makes statues live

    by The Keminrun

    You're right, I missed that line (where was it?), but that actually only proves my point further. It's Moff making stuff up just out of whimsy without caring if it makes any sense. I will accept angels turning humans into angels. Both are living beings. But making statues live? How does that work? The angels aren't supposed to move when they are stone, they only turn to stone when they are seen. If they can't (really) move when they are stone, how does it make sense that they could cause stone/metal statues to acquire movement and thought? Do they now have flesh bodies when they are not observed? Do they have internal organs?

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 6:01 p.m. CST

    Eat happened to the last angel?

    by captain_kirk

    Did they just let it go?

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 6:01 p.m. CST

    What. What happened

    by captain_kirk

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 6:14 p.m. CST

    @malckwan y I was hoping for more of THAT book

    by Kathryn Gail

    Sure, I like a good noir, too, but I was hoping for a bit more from the Flesh and Stone book. That whole early sequence with the book and the video were exquisitely chilling and well constructed. The rest of the story was good, too, but as the Angel concept started to unravel, my suspension of disbelief wavered along with it. To be fair, though, TATM DID draw me in enough that I'd forgotten until now how they had a perfectly good hardboiled detective character at the beginning, and just dropped him completely, along with what exactly River was up to in costume with her thug friends. That guy was terrific. They should have either kept him in all through, or left him for another story and used that screen time to rationalize angel theory and make less rushed all the rushed-feeling things people have pointed out.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 6:24 p.m. CST

    Weeping Angels : a how to guide

    by Malcolm

    I've seen it in YouTube clips of the behind the scenes stuff that the angels are actually actresses in costume and make up. It was mentioned that any minor movement by the actresses was compensated for by the special effects guys. Don't recall the exact YouTube clip but it had the angels doing the macarena if memory serves.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 6:42 p.m. CST


    by HornOrSilk

    I've seen it once, but I just remember a line about them taking over. So hopefully someone else will. Nonetheless, remember, and image of an angel is an angel, so they already show power over inanimate objects.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 6:47 p.m. CST

    thanks patrickstewart, that IS very impressive

    by Rebel Scumb

    kudos to the production team on that, the execution is flawless as far as I'm concerned.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 7:23 p.m. CST

    I wonder if the print edition of the book

    by HornOrSilk

    Will contain everything we saw on screen and flesh it out?

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 8:19 p.m. CST

    I thought S7 was the best of nu-who

    by pishowda

    The only episode I really didnt care for was Dinosaurs on a Spaceship, gimmick aside.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 8:38 p.m. CST

    keminrun - Ponds in Wales, and the Angels

    by DoctorTom

    The Ponds in Wales was most definitely not a fixed point in time, given that there were two of them at the beginning, and only Amy after Rory died and got pulled into the crack in time. So, we already know anything else that happens to them can overwrite the 2020 version of them being there. As for your points on the Angels: The one that grabbed River not having enough power to send her back in time - we've already seen that. None of the ones in Time of the Angels/Flesh and Stone had been powerful enough to send people back in time too. It does take SOME energy to send them back in time. Think of it as a chemical reaction - some reactions require a certain activation energy to get it going (say, a thermite reaction), but once you get it going you get much more energy out of it than the initial investment that they put in. We also know that feeding off of somebody's timeline isn't the only way they feed - the ones in Time of the Angels were feeding off the leaking reactor from the Byzantium (which, as a coincidental note, seems to be something in common with another stone-based race - the Kastrians from The Hand of Fear, where Eldrad reconstituted himself from the energy from a nuclear reactor), and were looking at the cracks initially as a food source until they realized it was too much for them to process. As for controlling other statues - why not? I imagine it takes a lot of power to convert them (which is why the probably set up the battery farm). Your comments about the Angels only turning to stone when they're seen seems to be contradicted by when we saw the one moving in Flesh and Stone - they were still looking like stone then, so they're most likely a silicon or other stone based lifeform. Quantum locking might make their forms stronger, though they can still be damaged. There's no reason to expect them to be flesh when not looked at (though some might be stone and some might be flesh, depending on their origin - converted statues would be stone, converted humans might be flesh). Asking if statues converted to Angels have internal organs seems to me to be a little like asking if Autons have internal organs - yes, if they're modelled that way, but they don't need to have them.

  • Oh No It Isn't! ;)

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 8:50 p.m. CST

    Rebel Scumb - cruelty this season

    by DoctorTom

    I think the Doctor had been thinking that if the paradox happened, it would take care of the other people in the building too. This is speculation, though, and he might not have cared. He certainly didn't care about the other people in the Shakri ship last week. I think the Doctor's mood is being mirrored in the darkness of the opening credits. The talk last season about the Doctor falling so low after being raised so high, I think we're still in the middle of his fall.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 8:53 p.m. CST

    Fart machine!!!!!!

    by DoctorTom

    You obviously know where I am in the podcast. Glen, I agree with you about Dredd 3D (I saw the 2D version though, I don't do Real3D for several reasons, and I don't have an IMAX theater in town to go see 3D movies at). The trailers just don't fit the movie that well, and I think might have undercut people going to see it. It's interesting watching The Raid: Redemption at about the same time because of some similar elements.

  • Given that he wrote this too, maybe they could even get him to write the script he'd direct. I could see him and Moffat collaborating on a script that heavily into timey wimey shenanigans. MINOR SPOILER (but not really) I think that the idea he came up with for the older version to have a cloudy memory based on the probability of what's going to happen based on the younger's actions, and that really he only remembers what happened after the younger version of himself does it would be a very good way to explain some of the multi-Doctor stories; it certainly reconciles why the newer Doctors don't remember what the older ones do before they do it. (You'd still have to hand wave Time Crash away if you went with this explanation though, although it might turn out that the inside of a TARDIS provides some protection against this, possibly by Sexy using the telepathic circuits to help people keep their memories inside.)

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:01 p.m. CST

    an attempt to roll up this joint

    by bongo dummy

    River + Angel's Grip + time Vortex Wristband= river ain't going nowhere. Last page of book (which I ain't gonna buy or read): Amy tells the Doctor tell Young Amy almost exactly what the Doctor told Young Amy in 'The Big Bang'. Old Amy & Rory, living in 1969 NYC, raise young Melody for a while until she poofs off and begins hanging out with Young Amy & Rory in 21st C. England. River should know her own life despite the early blanks that showed up in 'Let's Kill Hitler', right? She should know she lived in NYC with the Ponds and that she regenerated there. River should know not only her own history but the history of Rory & Amy which is why she encouraged Amy to let the Angel do its thing. The Graveyard angel was shown when they first landed in the graveyard, at a distance from the TARDIS box. Brian Williams--somehow not the anchorman-- can still be Rory's dad. He won't be his own Grandson or whatever kooky notion is out there. In 'Blink', the brother of the girl sent back in time remained her brother and he had a nephew/grand nephew he knew nothing about. As for Brian finding out what happened...what pray tell happened to Amy's Mom and Dad? They haven't been referred to since the Big Bang. The only parents that matter here, in my opinion, are Rory & Amy. Early NuWho gave a lot of emphasis on parents with the three previous companions. But, at some point with the latest two, it was almost a cursory introduction of the parents. That sucks considering that makes Brian seem like a base that needed to be tagged and was sort of an afterthought. Heck, Craig and his partner and Stormaggedon probably have more purpose in the Matt Smith who than does the parents of R & A. I'm curious if anyone looked back on that bedtime story scene in 'The Big Bang' right before he seemed to step into the crack of Time and when he says he was done watching repeats [of his life with Amy?] and wanted to step on to 'the other side' so the crack would seal. Did that particular Doctor need to be the same one from the rewind scenes OR could it be post- 'Angels Take Manhattan' Doctor saying a final farewell....which Amy remembers on her wedding day. It is a really roundabout excursion to think that the very tired Doctor in the 'Big Bang' was much older than the any between that Season Finale and Now but....what does anyone think?

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:03 p.m. CST

    bah. that was too long; i'll keep it short this time

    by bongo dummy

    my 'HAT' was that the weeping angels would zap some version of Oswin Dalek Girl Doe Eyes back into time and explain whatever they are trying to explain by setting up such a premise for her character. i am really curious about the 'big bang' stuff I wrote above if you skim through that long list, look for 'big bang' if you read any of it.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:09 p.m. CST

    The Robot Death of Doom

    by DoctorTom

    I'd watch that episode, Ken! Death, Time, Doom, Fear seem to be used a lot (with Seeds getting a couple of mentions) We still haven't had the Death of Death yet, or: The Seeds of Time The Seeds of Fear The Time of Death The Doom of Death The Death of Doom The Time of Doom-y Death The Hand of Time The Fear of Time The Doom of Fear The Death of Fear The Only Thing We Have to Fear is Death Itself (probably a story with FDR and Churchill together) The Tomb of Doom of course, we can enter Terry Nation mode and come up with: The Seeds of the Daleks The Daleks of Fear The Fart Machine of the Daleks (this one would probably be podcast only) Or, going the Kit Pedlar route: The Doom of the Cybermen The Cybermen of Fear

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:17 p.m. CST

    bongodummy - I agree about Amy's parents

    by DoctorTom

    just the little bit we saw Augustus made me want to see more about him. The only other family Moffat wanted to really develop though, it seems, was Melody/River. At least we did get 2 stories with Rory's dad. That means, not counting River/Melody, the Doctor (son-in-law) or Amy, Rory has had relatives in 1 fewer story than Tegan has had (Logopolis, Arc of Infinity, The Awakening for what it's worth). Not counting Rory, the Doctor or Melody/River, Amy has had the same number of stories with relatives in it as Adric had. Think about that for a while - some things are certainly echoing classic Who more than RTD Who now. We should start a campaign saying Don't Be An Adric - Have the Families More Involved.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:24 p.m. CST

    A thought on time being rewritten and this episode

    by DoctorTom

    River's comments on not letting the Doctor see you get old - think that time might get rewritten by having River regenerate before she would have interacted with Tennant at the Library? Her having the pardon that she mentioned might or might not be the same pardon that she had been promised at the crash of the Byzantium. I'd have thought, though, that if she got a pardon because the person she supposedly killed never existed, they'd have just pardoned her without the conditions. We might already have had time being rewritten.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:31 p.m. CST

    Angels and Statues

    by Malcolm

    Not digging the Angels being able to take over statues, to me it lacks a certain poetry. The expansion of Angel lore in The Time of Angels and Flesh and Stone I could buy... the image of an angel becoming itself an angel and that starring too long into the eyes of an angel allows an angel into your mind that makes its way out. It all centered around images whether it was a video, or an illustration in a book or in one's mind. That's why the SoL and miscellaneous statuary in NYC and those ridiculous cherubs don't sit well with me as they detract from the iconic form of the Weeping Angels. That's where their power lies for me.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 9:57 p.m. CST

    Just didn't feel like goodbye, and felt a little TOO timey-wimey

    by Barrymore

    I liked the episode, but to me, the Ponds are alive and well and living in NYC in the middle years of the 20th century. Couldn't the Doctor visit them at any time after 1938? Heck, the First Doctor might have passed them in The Chase. The ages on the tombstones--82 and 87, I'm guessing that they basically died the years that they were each born. (Like Old Amy is dying in NYC in 1990 while lil Amelia is being born in Scotland). Anyway, overall, it was sad, but not overly emotional. Honestly, I've been dying to see Matt Smith with a new companion and how he interacts with them. And who better than Oswin?!

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 10:13 p.m. CST

    Fixed Points in Time

    by Gislef_crow

    They date back to season one of original Doctor Who. The concept was enunciated in "The Aztecs" when the Doctor told Barbara that she couldn't change the concept of blood sacrifice in Aztec culture or save anyone. Although that was a general theme of most of the "big" historical 1st Doctor adventures. They could observe, but never alter history with Napoleon, Marco Polo, and so on.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 10:16 p.m. CST

    How come the cherubs can giggle...

    by The Transformed Man

    ...when Angel Bob had to use a dead guy's voice to communicate with the Doctor?

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 10:17 p.m. CST

    the year the episode took place: barrymore

    by bongo dummy

    So you think the episode took place the year Amy and Rory were born? The episode started out with a song by Sting. What year was that released? (i don't even know what song it is--i hate Sting so much.ARRRRGGGH: STIIIIIIIIING!) Were there any other indicators of the year it started in? They got medium sized coffees with coffee lids. That puts up a starting point because coffees, even ones in styrofoam cups, used to be tiny...but bigger than Dixie Cups. BIG THEORY: The Weeping Angels were a 20th Century/21st Century villain, right? From 'Blink onward they didn't 'exist' in the 'Pandorica Opens' did they? I surely can not be the first to suggest that they could very well be the reincarnated women from Pompeii who covered their eyes. Not only was that the same episode where a pre-Amy Karen G. appeared but it is an episode where 'fixed points in time' come up, where the Doctor basically says, 'Kill 'em all!' and there were stone creatures in that one, right? So, if the Weeping angels are screwing with the Doctor based on something he did in the past, so that could be a similar motivator for The Silence. But, of course, we havent' heard about them in a while, have we? What has it been two years, since the Season Finale of Season 6? Angels- Revenge Seekers who screw up relationships Silence-Revenge Seekers who try to make people forget stuff and who are trying to kill the Doctor who is trying to make people forget his actually exists. Maybe none of this is supposed to make sense.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 10:19 p.m. CST

    Atraxxi in Manhattan?

    by Cletus1974

    Did anyone else think the large blinking eye on the jumbotron seemed a little more like the Attraxxi eye from the Eleventh Hour. Especially thinking of the first time you see it and there are sound effects when it blinks. Could it be that not everyone has "forgotten" about the Doctor?

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 11:09 p.m. CST

    bongodummy...birthday years

    by Barrymore

    No sorry, I hope I wasn't confusing. I think the start of "Angels" takes place in 2012. Then they all (eventually) go to 1938. The Ponds are each about 30 years old. If they both live to be in their 80s, that's 50ish years added on to 1938 (since they end up trapped in 1938). So, they would each die about 1988. Sometime around the late 80's-early 1990's, they should each be born over in the UK to start their lives. And the Doctor probably meets lil Amelia when she is 10, somewhen around the year 2000. I think.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 11:10 p.m. CST

    The year was 2012

    by Cletus1974

    The doctor said we're back in 2012 when they woke up in the cemetery. Same time and place as the picnic at the beginning since he ran back to get the afterword from the picnic basket.

  • Sept. 30, 2012, 11:19 p.m. CST

    Humpty Dumpty

    by Cletus1974

    Maybe the egg references were foreshadowing Amy and Rory's humpty dumpty jump from the wall of the "farm"

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 2:10 a.m. CST

    Extra floor and alien burn marks

    by jacksparness

    Why was there an extra floor? Because it was a three floor house. Simple as. Although it probably could be said to be a character building device e.g. The loneliness of Pond etc. The Alien burn marks on the grass outside the house I've always assumed were the Daleks when they were creating the Pandorica scenario from Amy's memories.

  • Still here, and will over-shoot my personal goal/deadline for moving out by about 12 sleepless hours. After I am settled in (and Internet is working in new place), I expect to be here again in full force. I've missed you all. And thanks for the kind words directed at me. Makes me feel great while I'm saying my goodbyes and leaving the place I have lived in for almost 10 years. It has been emotionally and physically jarring, and I now realize I have FAR too much *crap* for one person. I will most likely spend the next month just going through collectables, posters, comics, CDs, records, old tapes, old VHS recordings, etc etc etc to figure out what I can digitize, what I can discard, what I can give away, what I can sell, as well as what I simply could never let go of for sentimental reasons. Time to simplify. I think the reason why this episode hit me so hard was that it was all about goodbyes and new beginnings. Some of the people I have spent holidays with, lived with, laughed with over the years I will probably not see again, or not see much of. Not to take away from what I think was the most satisfying yet truly troubling farewell I have (yet) seen in the history of Who. I thought it was brilliantly written, acted and directed. And the craft that has gone into this season/series really shined this time. It was both intimate and massive/movie-like. Once again... BRAVO to all involved.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 4:33 a.m. CST

    Can we get good episodes now

    by T

    Good bye Amy and Rory. Now go away moffat and take the angels with you.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 5:24 a.m. CST

    talkbackers or in this case docbackers..

    by popboy

    are very fickle. wasnt long ago that people were telling russell t to feck off and not let the door hit his fatt ass on the way out. you cant really base the success or failure of a writer on the basis of one episode. people love blink and hailed it as a masterpiece. people then kind of went a bit delirious with Moffatlove. and kind of went what the hell is that silly welsh man Davis doing ruining our show with his horrible equality agenda. pfo russell. and give the show to Moffat. Moffat is now the show runner. and is in charge the series 50th Birthday. and I cant believe that three years seasons into the Moffat era people want to see the back of him. do I have gripes with Moffat, I do, yes. the long running River song saga is chief among them. dr who has become a bit routine in his hands. I loathed the slow mo stuff in angels take Manhattan. the new companion is yummy looking.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 5:45 a.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    for the record, I've never had any problem with RTD, and I've had these concerns about Moffat since early in series 6

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 5:45 a.m. CST

    One thing I find off about viewer reaction...

    by glenn_the_frog

    A lot of people are decrying "how is it that reading it in a book makes it fixed? That doesn't make any sense?" When, the answer is clear. It's because the book was written in the future of the Doctor's timeline, without any attempt to distort the facts by someone the doctor knows... and the book was designed to provide the most exact and timing specific answer possible for the benefit of the person reading it. Giving clues exactly when they would be needed... because they were always given at that moment. It is EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE VIDEO TAPE IN BLINK. That was also recorded after the fact... even had exact conversations built in, and even the fact that it played multiple times in Sally's experience before it made proper sense. It was a clue from the future, left for the doctor's present. Made a closed loop. Much like most of River's timeline, really. Most of the adventures she knows what the Doc's next adventure is going to be... because its the one she just had. Is it because it was written in a novel that people had trouble with it? Would it have been easier to accept if it had been tomorrow's newspaper? An internet file showing that the astronauts died? A video tape again?

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 6:44 a.m. CST

    @doctortom - how far the weeping angels have fallen

    by The Keminrun

    [They're] only [statues] when you see them... They're as old as the universe, or very nearly, and they have survived this long because they have the most perfect defense system ever evolved: they're quantum locked! They don't exist when they are being observed, the moment they are seen by any other living creature they freeze into rock. No choice, it's a fact of their biology, on the sight of any other living thing they literally turn to stone. And you can't kill a stone. Of course a stone can't kill you either, but then you turn your head away . . .

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 6:46 a.m. CST

    ok rebel scumb

    by popboy

    i take your point. i thought season 6 was an utter mess. but maybe you have to take season 6 and 7 together. or something.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 7:21 a.m. CST

    @glenn_the_frog - written record vs. observed record

    by The Keminrun

    What bother me so much is that we are told over and over again in Who that the future can be rewritten (even if you have seen it), that to suddenly be told that the future is absolutely written in stone if you have read about it is obviously just lazy writing, especially since the written word is less reliable than firsthand experience - and if he could tell River to have Amy write an afterward, he could also tell her to lie when she wrote the account of their adventures so that what he had already read would not actually be true. And again I'll point out that the Doctor READ the time and place of his death and yet he changed THAT "fixed point in time". My problem is not with the episode as a standalone episode. My problem is that it does not fit in with established canon and I refuse to become invested in a show when even the showrunner doesn't care enough to maintain "realistic" parameters. (No, I don't expect the show to be actually realistic, but I do expect internal consistency.)

  • then you should actually pay attention and get the facts right, don't you think? The people who want to get rid of Moffat, have been wanting him out for a long time. That's hardly a recent development. It certainly didn't take 3 years. And people like myself and rebel_scumb and others who didn't like this particular batch of episodes, aren't calling for his resignation. Same with praise / criticism for Matt Smith. Some loved him from the first ep. Some hated his guts and couldn't wait for Doctor 12. (Some clung vainly to the hope that Tennant would somehow come back) But in either case, it's been pretty consistant with each one for the last 3 years. There is simply no evidence to say that after 3 years, the tide has turned, and now fickle docbackers want the Moff gone. The facts just don't bear that out, at all.

  • There were the presented facts, that he purposely staged and played out according to how it was documented to go, and made appear to be exactly what history recorded. Its exactly the same here. There are presented facts, that he purposely staged and played out according to how it was documented to go, and made appear to be exactly what history recorded. He was always in a tesselecta suit, that never changed, just the audience perception. Rory always ended up in 1938, and even the paradox probably always happened and was documented in the book. Sally Sparrow always had a sign that said "duck" to read and a video to watch that would match up with her conversation once. Its EXACTLY the same use of a person who has already lived through the adventure documenting it, and sharing that document with the past, and it overlapping a little between individuals. Wibbly wobbly timey wimey, it's EXACTLY the same as has been established before, just the presentation is different. The argument is "River could have lied in the book." Okay, running on that argument (that was never presented in the actual show at all) then what? To what end? Why would she lie? To protect them? To make the goodbye easier? To prevent something worse? So they could raise her as a child? So the doctor won't have another adventure with the Ponds after the book is written when they're happy, in their 50's, and well past adventuring age? What's the point of River lying in the book? He can force a way to see them whenever he wants... but it was the goodbye they all needed... but couldn't bring themselves to commit to without an excuse. it was a goodbye, that had been coming between them for a long time. A forced, but inevitable one. Better than him actually getting them killed. If they had been in *danger*, if being zapped to the past was going to give them terrible lives, the Doctor would have broken the universe to save them, as he did attempt when it was *just* Rory, or when Amy had spent 40 years trapped in that sped up asylum by herself. But... for them to live out long, natural, happy lives, together? There's no need for him to interfere with that.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 7:53 a.m. CST

    Why would River lie? So she wouldn't have to break her own arm!

    by The Keminrun

    Doctor: "I have to break your wrist since Amy read that I have to." River: "oh, that? That's just a dramatic twist I'm adding to the text to make you look like a prick." Doctor: "Yowza! Good thinking! Now let's break this angel's arm!"

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 7:56 a.m. CST

    Yeah, the Angels fell so hard that..

    by shutupfanboy

    they took out two companions, a feat only a few have managed to do in the 50 years of Doctor Who. People need to think before they write shit. They may have topped the Daleks. It wasn't a great episode, but Amy's good bye to the Doctor and River was damn heart breaking. Getting rid of Moffat was a damn ass idea in season 5 and while I have several problems with season 6, this season has been pretty damn tight. Its even a more dumb ass idea now. I also don't remember that many people wanting Moffat out as it was more of people wanting to suck his dick for taking the job. It is now fickle fans who can cry for the Ponds to be gone, Moffat to leave and a new Doctor. You wait for all inductions the new girl is all tits and Joss Whedon banner and zero substance. We may have a Martha on our hands.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 9:40 a.m. CST

    Just realized... it's the Peter Pan ending!

    by glenn_the_frog

    The Ponds aren't exactly stuck in New York. They just have to ultimately die and be buried there prior to 2012. They've got 50 years of leeway and a happy lifetime in there. They even going to go back to Britain to wave at their past selves eventually. But... they were getting older and wanting to settle down into a non-Doctor life anyway. Which means no more going in and grabbing them to go off on a crazy adventure across time and space that puts them at risk... which is what the Doc is all about. He's not about visiting for lunch or hanging out for a couple days doing nothing... he's about visiting for an epic adventure. That was the entire point of the last several episodes, especially Dinosaurs on a spaceship and the Power of Three. The doctor CAN visit them again. (River can at least the once, they explained there's workaround.) But if he did? It would be with *getting older and depressing no more adventures all grown up have to say goodbye* Amy. It's kind of like the ending of Peter Pan really. Where Peter visits a grown up Wendy and she says *I can't go to Neverland anymore, I'm too old for your kind of adventures.* Except then Peter immediatley fell in love with Wendy's daughter... They had a quick gut-churning farewell... but its ultimately what both parties ultimately needed. The Doc has spent 300 years trying to let go of a 20 year period in the Pond's lives!

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 9:52 a.m. CST

    It goes back to Amy's Choice.

    by glenn_the_frog

    Idylic settled life... or crazy adventure. Its the question that kept coming up for Amy and Rory time and time again... and they kept kind of wanting to choose to settle down... but then their old buddy shows up and they don't want to upset him, so they agree to one more adventure, for his sake... and then another... and eventually they're just too old for this nonsense but they just can't say no to him... But ultimately Amy will choose Rory over the doctor... and thats a choice she made time and time again. Again, had they been in danger and trouble... the Doc would have done anything, ripped the universe apart, to save them. But content with long happy lives? He's able to let them go. Its harder on him than it is on them, ultimately. But he can still run into them *someday* and have another random adventure, ala Sarah Jane. He just can't go grab them to check out a dinosaur spaceship whenever he has the whim.

  • Yeah, I'm definitely NOT one calling for Moffat to move on. Saturday's show would be no fun at all to critique if he'd set up a boring world; I'd just have turned it off. He and (for shame, I had to go back and add this 'and,' my lack of natural fairness and objectivity!) everyone who works on the show are pretty much. . . um. . . really really important (oversharing: ew). . . RTD gets a standing ovation for bringing the show back but he never really made me babble about amazing insights into real life.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 10:02 a.m. CST

    @glenn_the_frog - The Doctor's "death" in IA

    by The Keminrun

    Moffat insisted that the Doctor was really dead in IA, which means one of two things: 1) The Doctor really died in IA and changed time in WoRS. Which means that "fixed" points in time can be cheated. 2) Moffat was lying, which would do nothing to make me respect him again. In any case the point that bothers me isn't whether or not there are fixed points in time that cannot be changed, but the conceit that reading about your future fixes the future you read in time. Writing (and the reading of it) can be unreliable. If reading something about your future self really could fix your future in time then the Silence could easily get rid of the Doctor. Have them publish a fake obituary in the Space Time Gazette declaring that the Doctor was shot in the head with a really-can-truly-kill-the-Doctor gun and he died completely, did not regenerate, was not wearing a Teselecta suit, was not really a ganger, but was really truly dead beyond a doubt and then give it to an earlier version of himself. Then he would HAVE to show up and allow himself to be shot with the really-can-truly-kill-the-Doctor gun just to stop the universe from imploding. BECAUSE HE READ ABOUT IT HAPPENING. Stupid? Yes. I rest my case.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 10:20 a.m. CST

    cletus1974 - the timeline doesn't make sense

    by DoctorTom

    yes, he said that they're back in 2012, but the paper that Amy was reading at the beginning said the Detroit Lions won the Super Bowl. We know they didn't win in 2012, and even if they had that would have placed the time in February 2012. There wouldn't have been enough time for the other stories (10 months between TWORS and the beginning of Asylum of the Daleks, further time between episodes, and 1 year starting in the summer for The Power of Three). Trying to figure out when the Ponds' adventures occurred is starting to get like figuring out when the UNIT stories occurred.

  • There's a fundamental difference between a book and a video of someone. The video is there, and we see the person narrating the video. We know that he has said the things in the videos. A book does not show the person making the claims, and there is the chance that the words might or might not be true. Presumably the text is as it was written originally, but there could have been editors of the books who changed things. Heck there could be a typo that takes things well out of context. If there was a sentence that said The Doctor ties and he read that, would we have Matt Smith going nuts trying to figure out what he's supposed to tie, even though it was a typo and should have said The Doctor lies? And, we've had River say that she lies, constantly. How do you know that what's in the book is the stone cold truth? The only things we know that are true are the bit when Rory popped up, and the bit about the wrist. Everything else in the book could have been completely made up. River could have said near the end *and then the Doctor rescued Amy and Rory by riding in on a purple unicorn*. He didn't read it, so you don't know if it's in there or not. He hasn't read anything but chapter titles and the afterward after Amy's mention of the wrist, so there could be anything in there. This is because all of stuff that the Doctor didn't read is irrelevant. More importantly, from the chapter titles, it seems to follow the story itself, but based on the chapter titles it doesn't deal with the Ponds after they are sent back into the past - nothing at all mentioned in River's story about what happens after they're in the past. The only mention is what Amy puts in the afterward. As for the afterward, we don't know if it's the complete truth or if there are things missing from Amy's afterward. They could still have an adventure with the Doctor and not mention it in the afterward because the Doctor tells them not to mention it in the book.

  • Sara Kingdom, Katarina, Captain Jack (it took miracle glow-y Rose to bring him back, so I'd say that death counts). They can be held responsible for what happened to Donna, which could be considered worse than Death. There's a fair chance the Daleks also took out Romana in the Time War, but that's not set in stone. That said, I agree you have a point about what the Angels accomplished.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 10:54 a.m. CST

    Are Amy and Rory free, or are they trapped in the Angels' hotel?

    by Royston Lodge

    It's not entirely clear in the show.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 11:13 a.m. CST

    Royston lodge - they're free

    by DoctorTom

    from what they said, the paradox took out the Angels, so there shouldn't have been any more there to keep people trapped (even if that's where they got zapped back to). We know they had to be free because River eventually comes back to get Amy to publish the story. She'd need to be able to get around to publish it. Also, she probably would have complained about being cooped up in the hotel in the afterward and put in a comment about a specific date for the Doctor to come pick them up (the equivalent of River leaving coordinates with her Hello Sweetie messages) if she'd been stuck in the hotel. And you know the Doctor would have gone back for that.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 11:42 a.m. CST

    Lines of Sight

    by Malcolm

    I still find the conclusion poorly crafted... that the angel could have snuck up behind Rory whilst in Amy's line of sight and then Amy being zapped when the Doctor and River are looking at her and the angel behind her. I'd've loved to see a more deliberate letting go from the Doctor where he realizes what's best for Amy and Rory is for Amy to go back and so he and River say goodbye and deliberately blink to allow the quantum locked angel to reach and touch Amy to send her back in time to her husband.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 11:57 a.m. CST

    there is NO difference between book and video

    by glenn_the_frog

    Not when you know the person who made it, and you trust them, and their specific reason for making it was to fullfill a timeloop because they always did. If River had just had a tape recorder going the whole time and then handed over an audiobook version after, (but before the episode started) it would have been exactly the same except they'd be playing a tape recorder the whole time. The book is part of the loop exactly as it was... because it was always exactly as written. Editorial changes, typos, don't matter. The book that was written and published after the episode ended became the book at the start. Timey wimey. The doctor could have completely lied on the video tape in Blink as well and gone off script and started singing Model of a Modern Major general... but he DIDN'T. He created the thing that went back. Just because it was made afterward, doesn't mean it isn't accurate or able to interact showing up before hand. Its the same loop. No room for lying, because it IS what was there. If the silents or the Daleks handed the doctor an obituary from the future, he'd have no reason to accept it as truth. Its not himself or River sending the message. But if there's a photo of him on the message, he knows that "oh well, there needs to be me and a photo at some point." and he'd figure out how to make that happen. There's REPORTS of his death at silencio? He makes it so that seems to be the case... and sets it up so his companions see it to send him clues later about it before he ever knows about it.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, noon CST

    A poor departure

    by Carmen A

    For me, it was not a great episode at all. It suffered from the usual rushed pacing, which seems to come with the New-Who territory. But this time the episode itself felt as if it was pushed into the series suddenly, as if the actors' contracts had suddenly expired and they had to write them out quickly. What was with River's voice? Why was she talking so strangely? Amy's mugging was particularly off-putting, especially the way she kept putting her face into the Doctor's every time she read a line. It's a recurring problem: the companions are "cute" when we first meet them, as they learn the ropes. Then they switch gears suddenly and become "seasoned" (usually between the course of one episode) and after that they are arrogant and cocky, and confrontational. Even Rose suffered from this. Can't a companion be experienced without being pushy? There was a whole lot of looking away and blinking going on, and yet the Angels didn't always move. Especially at the end. The last Angel takes Amy, then is left standing there while the Doctor and River look away... and nothing happens. And there was never much explanation as to how the Angels "took" Manhattan, and why no one noticed the Statue of Liberty walking around and moving location... TWICE. If they "took over every statue in NYC" wouldn't the entire city have been wiped out? While this episode probably did the best job in selling the love between Rory and Amy, it's still based on some bad history and chemistry. Amy consistently treats Rory poorly, saving her best niceties for the Doctor, and yet we are supposed to believe she loves him. I was never sold on that, but this episode did the best job yet of (finally) presenting a true connection between the characters. Then they killed them off. A very poor episode, confusing not because of its cleverness or anything that would be wrapped up with a second viewing, but confusing because it was rushed, messy and poorly written. An off-topic question: is Karen Gillan pregnant? She seemed quite "puffy" in the face. Double chin and all!

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 12:21 p.m. CST

    Doctortom-totally agree the timeline doesn't make sense

    by Cletus1974

    But what if that's a clue? If the Doctor is erasing all knowledge of himself, or has erased all knowledge of himself at this point, shouldn't that have an effect on history? Lions win Superbowl, Lakers win the Stanley cup, things could be askew. Who would have defeted the Attraxxi, or the Daleks, or anyone the Doctor has come up against? Did those events just not happen? I get that Oswin erased him from the Dalek database, but what if that was just the spark that sent the Doctor out to erase all his past deeds in a way that he was still victorious, but remained anonymous? Didn't all his enemies try to lock him away in the Pandorica because they thought he was the one that had cracked the universe? Maybe this is the cause of the cracks. I am really starting to think the image of the blinking eye near the beginning of TATM was the Attraxxi. They were from the other side of the crack in Amelia's wall, and thoeretically not from this universe, so it would make sense that the Doctor would not have erased himself from their memory. But when they did meet face to face, the Doctor had them scan him so they would know who they were dealing with and run away. (Still not sure why they were able to surround the earth being that they were from the other side of the crack, but hey, suspension of disbelief). So in theory the Attraxxi would have a full record of the Doctor up to The Eleventh Hour, and maybe the blinking eye was to show that he is being surveilled, and could potentially be exposed to the rest of the universe that currently doesn't know he exists.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 12:38 p.m. CST

    Everyone dies....

    by Darth_Nader

    That was the theme here. It's not that the Pond's 'died'. Since they were always aging faster than the doctor, at some point they would die before him. The tombstone showed that the "Williams'" live for another 50+ years. Nothing sad about that. The last episode they said they would have to choose between the Doctor and 'real life'. The angel just made the change for them. Since the Hotel was presumably destroyed in the paradox, they just went back in time, and spent out their days with each other growing old together. I think it's ultimately a happy ending. Only the Doctor is being selfish.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 12:46 p.m. CST

    Glenn the frog, sorry but that's just not true

    by DoctorTom

    There doesn't HAVE to be a difference between what's in a book and what's in a video, but on the other hand it doesn't HAVE to be the same. What's the time loop created by the book? River only has to put in the parts that the Doctor read, nothing more and nothing less. The rest can be filler. Amy has to put in the afterward that the Doctor reads. The afterward doesn't have to be the complete truth, it just has to say what it said in what the Doctor read. It doesn't have to mention that the Doctor visits them 10 or 20 times, since the afterward made no mention at all that they never saw the Doctor again. Or, even if you get a mention, the Doctor could tell Amy to leave that out of the afterward. The Doctor lies, by his own admission. River lies, by her own admission. A tombtone is found with Rory and Amy's name, with an age on it for their death. No witnessing of those deaths like Rory's first death in the story was. There was no digging up of the graves to actually look to see if any bodies were buried there. There were no years listed on the tombstone, so there's no pinning down when they die, even if you treat the tombstone as not being a lie. The book and the tombstone are nothing more than reports of the Doctor's death. Many people have discussed here how it can easily be worked around. We're not saying that it's provably not true, we're just saying that it's not definitive proof that it is. That means that if they want to bring Amy and Rory back in some story, it's certainly possible. If they don't, this gives them some closure, but doesn't close the door on a different producer wanting to do something with it in the future. I fail to see how it's possible to credibly insist that the entire rest of their lives are timelocked when it's been demonstrated that there are ways around it.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 12:57 p.m. CST

    cletus - fair point, but...

    by DoctorTom

    I can see the Doctor erasing all knowledge of himself changing things - I think it's already affected River's timeline, and the adventure with the Crash of the Byzantium might not have happened now, or happened differently (like I've said here, I don't see them forcing her to take the mission to get that pardon.) Likewise, it's possible that erasing the knowledge of the Doctor might have made the Lions win the Superbowl (I think they're actually one of the teams favored to be in it in 2013). I don't see, though, things changing to the point where the Superbowl isn't at the beginning of the year. That certainly didn't look like early February in New York - they're not nearly bundled up enough. Personally I think that was just a continuity thing that slipped through the cracks. If it had been said to be 2013 then there would have been enough time for the Pond's chronology (though it still doesn't explain the Superbowl bit - I don't see them having skipped around in time in New York City and Amy reading a paper from the future - the Doctor would probably be big about spoilers for something like that). It's obvious that the Doctor's name being eliminated from databases is leading up to someone asking him Doc-tor Who? at the Fields of Trenzalore. I don't know if there's supposed to be that much changed other than people not knowing who the Doctor is - I suspect we'll figure out more after Christmas and we start to find out about the whole Clara/Oswin thing.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 12:59 p.m. CST

    Quick thought on the Christmas Special

    by DoctorTom

    I read somewhere that one of the proposed titles for the Christmas special is Snowmen. I'm wondering if that means we're going to get the Yeti in the Christmas Special. They're also known as abominable snowmen.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 1:17 p.m. CST

    Detroit Lions winning the Super Bowl....

    by Dancingforever

    That would mean the earliest this episode could have happened would be Feb 2013. Nice catch to the one other person who caught that by the way. :)

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 2:17 p.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    As usual v'shael's thoughts echo my own and vice versa I in no way am calling for Moffat to step down, other than in the most basic sense that I know writers, actors and producers are always coming and going from the franchise which is part of what has kept it fresh, so at some point I expect Moffat to pass the torch I do believe with his resume as it is, he has accomplished more as a TV writer (not just a drwho writer) than many of his peers could ever hope to do in there in entire careers But I also think most artist of any medium have a certain amount of great work in them, and generally the quality of output begins to fade with time. I mean really are there many filmmakers, writers, or musicians where as they got older their work just got better and better? I'm sure there are a few, but no examples come to mind. Nor do I think what Moffat has done this year is utter crap (though that xmas special was quite the stinker) But I do think, for whatever reason, the quality of the writing on the show has diminished. Sure that's partially because the bar is set so high by his Tennant era episode, and season 5 as a complete season is especially strong. But regardless, the 2 part opener to season 6 aside, I've noticed a drop off in the overall quality of the show since then, and been vocal about it in the docback. It was the notion of being fickle I was arguing against, and I agree with v'shael that where ever people sit on the spectrum of reaction to the show, most docbackers have been pretty consistent. Seems like the majority felt this last stretch of 5 were sub par as a whole. Though I think most here are even minded enough that if the xmas special this year and the back 8 really knock our socks off everyone will be all to happy to say so. To me that's not being fickle, just not getting locked into one opinion about something. The new show is in its 8th year, there was bound to be a fall off eventually, that happens to any show. I am quite surprised it happened under Moffat, but it was bound to happen to someone.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 2:20 p.m. CST

    doctortom-I'm agree with you, not sure where the difference is

    by glenn_the_frog

    I'm not saying that the book says every single second of their life is dictated. Or that River put down any extra defining details. The book, and the tombstone, says that they died in New York. And for all intents and purposes, that's true. The book, during the adventure, where River is factually reporting to the best of her ability, is what's iron clad and unchangeable. That period of a few hours is all. After the book is written? Amy and Rory have 50 years of free slate to largely do whatever they want... as long as eventually, there's a tombstone with their names on it. Speculate if you want on ways around that. Fake tombstone, an extra time trip or two in the interm, that's all fine and valid! That says they're going to live and die in New York. Doesn't say what every minute of those ~50 years are going to be. We know River can visit them at least once. They're free to do stuff and live their lives, and there IS room for them to meet the doctor again at some point.. But the immediate area of where they're at is problematic, and messing with them after that is just... messing with their lives even more. It is a tragedy, and if it was desperate, the doctor could find a workaround. But... as *just* a personal thing, well... it has to be allowed to sit as is, and the doctor has to accept to let it be. What if the doctor grabbed them and took them on an adventure in space, and Rory died again? Once again you're in paradox territory, and this time it would rip the world apart. No reason to risk that *just* because the doctor wants to visit. He *can* visit them (since River can) he just can't do anything that risks their lives, that has even a chance of them not ending up in NY when they're supposed to be... and the Doctor is always falling off schedule and risking lives. Its possible at some point, he thinks about it more, puts up a fake tombstone, grabs them, takes them to present day, and that's that. If it makes you feel better, thats what he eventually does. And maybe they'll be back in the 50th anniversary. Except, for the moment at least, he didn't. He didn't look for a loophole like he did for his own death. He opted to leave them alone... because Amy told him to... because she always did. Because she had a happy life, and because this way at least, torn up as he is... he doesn't have to watch her grow older and older.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 2:36 p.m. CST

    @ doctortom Re: Christman Special

    by Sequitur

    I would love to see the Yeti, but as we have seen with Moff the Xmas specials have a connection to a classic piece of Holiday themed literature Christmas Carol 2010 = Obviously... The Doctor, the Widow and the Wardrobe 2011 = Lion, Witch and Wardrobe This year The Snowman = Probably in reference to the classic British book of the same name:

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 2:58 p.m. CST

    Doctor changing timelines

    by HornOrSilk

    Fear Her no longer happened.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 3:12 p.m. CST

    glenn, I think I know where the disagreement is

    by DoctorTom

    It was just that you sounded like you were saying that every line in the book had to be true. We know what the Doctor read that came about was true, but beyond that, who knows. Addressing one of your points - actually, the tombstone doesn't say that Amy and Rory died in New York, the tombstone is merely located in New York. They're not the same thing; my dad died in Delaware but he was buried in Maine. Amy and Rory could really have tied anywhere, but their tombstone is in New York City. Did they die there? Who knows? They could have been sitting on the porch with Canton Everett Delaware after Canton delivered the can of gasoline, sipping lemonade in Utah when the two of them pass away peacefully, whereupon Canton respects their last wishes and has them buried in NYC. *What if the doctor grabbed them and took them on an adventure in space, and Rory died again? Once again you're in paradox territory, and this time it would rip the world apart. No reason to risk that *just* because the doctor wants to visit. * Not necessarily. All you need is a tombstone with Rory's name and it saying Age 82. He could die at any age, and as long as you have the right words on the tombstone there's no problem (and, it could actually end up like the bit in The Hungry Earth where things adjust here so that the age is modified if he dies at a different age, just like the universe didn't explode because suddenly there wasn't a 2020 Rory any more). For that matter, he and Amy could both be plastic and running around for 2000 years more, just with a tombstone with their names on it.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 3:16 p.m. CST

    Thanks, sequitur

    by DoctorTom

    I thought he was going to be riffing off of It's a Wonderful Life though based on some other comments. (And, the name Clara sounds like a nod to Clarence the (non-Weeping) angel as well as being a nod to Lis Sladen's middle name. Hmmm, still, a boy building a snowman - someone building a robot Yeti - it could still happen...

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 3:18 p.m. CST

    Parting thoughts...

    by 1TrueGod

    I arrived late to this party, but overall the above discussion was an excellent read. I thoroughly enjoyed this episode, possibly the best episode of this short season for me personally. I know many dislike River (a perspective I don't share), however I LOVED River in this episode. I for one will miss her character (and her interactions with the Doctor) once her story arch concludes. Besides the Silence/Forrest two parter & a good man, Angels is now my favorite 'river' related episode. Matt once again delivered, and dare I say, the ponds really hit an emotional high, probably the first time I truly felt/understood their love for one another. Sad to see them go, it's been a great run... now bring on JLC. I'm still hopeful her personality and genius will mirror the character we met in Asylum yet I have a feeling that won't be the case. Just like with Gwen Cooper, JLC may be introduced as an distant (and much earlier) relative. Sigh...

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 3:19 p.m. CST

    Hornorsilk - I don't think we get off that easily

    by DoctorTom

    The Silence made us forget David Tennant carrying the torch into the stadium...or the Doctor himself did as part of trying to erase records of his existence. Maybe he's adapted his sonic screwdriver to also work as a flashy thing from Men in Black, and when everyone was watching Doctor10 with the torch, Doctor11 popped onto the broadcast and flashed everyone with the sonic into forgetting. If only it were that easy to forget Fear Her. Matthew Graham almost completely negated all the good will he earned from Life on Mars with that story.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 3:23 p.m. CST

    Detroit Winning

    by bongo dummy

    Well, since it hasn't happened, yes that would possibly place it into the future. Unless... The Statue of Liberty Angel ceasing to exist meant that the Statue of Liberty no longer exists, removing an entire raft of trick plays that have been made in football. So, if this adds up properly then by the end of the episode, the Detroit Lions would not have won the Superbowl and instead another team would have won it because the Lions need every wing and a prayer they can possibly get. Without the Weeping Angels screwing with possibility, that team has a snowball's chance in hell at even making it to the championship game. Besides, if you look at the Times Square scenes, there is a big ad for the Dark Shadows movie on the right. So, that pegs it for the recent present.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 3:32 p.m. CST

    Glad you liked it, 1truegod

    by DoctorTom

    Despite plot holes I enjoyed it - the plot holes didn't bother me at the time. If the internet had been around during the classic series, we'd have had a lot of people posting about how The Curse of Fenric was crap because chess doesn't work that way, or what was said in The Time Monster about Chronus destroying Atlantis couldn't possibly be correct since it had already been destroyed twice by other people, or how the first part of the Attack of Cybermen was rubbish because nobody could knock off a Cyberman's head (ignoring the person already had cyberlimbs himself). Imagine what the hiatus between Seasons 22 and 23 would have been like if the internet like it is now were around then - they might never have brought the show back. But I digress. I enjoy seeing River in stories. I don't want to see her as a regular companion because some of what makes her special is her non-linear relation with the Doctor and sticking around story after story would wear that down. She works best as the occasional spice for a story during the season.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 3:36 p.m. CST

    thank fuck!

    by Kakii

    the ponds have gone! first 3 episodes were the best yet, last 2 sucked as with the last seasons as a whole with M.Smith please give smith his time to shine! otherwise hes just gonna end up as a C.Baker or S.McKoy. He has a great potential, I hope they use him till the fullness of that! thank god the whole pond stuff is over, im not religious but thank fucking god!!!

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 3:40 p.m. CST

    doctortom -agree completely

    by glenn_the_frog

    Just semantics of specific words getting in the way of the idea on my end. I agree with your take entirely.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 4 p.m. CST

    glenn the frog - cool!

    by DoctorTom

    I'm glad we got to an agreement amicably on this. It's probably some specific words on my end getting in your way too. It's nice to come to an agreement!

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 5:01 p.m. CST

    Once Again Doctortom

    by 1TrueGod

    You knowledge of all things who is astounding. I remember my first introduction to Who when I was a child and being completely fascinated with Tom Baker's Doctor, which coincidentally, has continued to influence my love of ridiculously long scarfs in the winter. He shall forever remain my all-time favorite incarnation of the doctor and although you screen name may or may not reflect that intention, I'll regard it as homage. Plot holes abound, but someone mentioned above that it's doctor who, and my 6 year old self can attest, has always been magical. I want to suspend my beliefs and enjoy the ride, even if that doesn't always happen. I completely agree on River never being to true companion. Hopefully Alex Kingston will remain an ageless beauty so that future incarnations of the Doctor will have an opportunity to run with River. She did mention having sketches of several incarnations.... one can hope.

  • Oct. 1, 2012, 7:51 p.m. CST

    Anyone who thinks season 5 was a step down needs to GTFO.

    by shutupfanboy

    I say this has a Tennant fanboy and Season 5 minus the Hungry Earth 2 Parter was amazing. The close season that comes to season 5 in New Who is Season 4 and even then there are some clunkers. 2 would also be up there.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 1:51 a.m. CST

    Just dawned on me about the egg thingy wingy

    by Adam Jones

    Episode 1 the 'eggs' fall off the Daleks. Episode 2 the eggs are those of the T-rex Episode 3 the egg shaped ship belonged to Jex Episode 4 the egg shaped head of the Shakri Episode 5 Didn't see any eggs..... odd. Will have to watch episode again frame for frame. Anyhow, all the eggs are related to something bad. Before, I was just focused on the idea that their were eggs in all the episodes. I never associated them with all the bad guys. There's something about those damn eggs, I just know it!

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 5:32 a.m. CST

    Hans Zimmer's "Time" works perfectly with this...

    by Sean C

    ...I saw the episode and rather enjoyed it. Typical Moffat plot holes here and there but I found it easy to ignore them and enjoy the story for what it was...a nice send-off of the Ponds. It worked well in that regard. I made a, well I guess you could call it a fan video, but I put clips from the episode to the Hans Zimmer track...and it works so well. So emotional. In my opinion at least! Would love to know what the Docback thinks!

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 6:32 a.m. CST

    The Moff went all the way of Schroedinger's Cat!

    by wtriker1701

    Once you open the box and look you know, if the the cat is dead or not. That's how he treats the Melody Malone Novella - and the tombstone. Quantum physics! And I'm totally in love with that idea! I loved TATM - would have been even greater as a 2-parter... but it got some mean twists at the end, while we were torn apart (most of us) by the idea of losing Amy and Rory forever (together). Gone - not gone - but then finally gone, though... very touchy! They've had each other for years now (as was hinted at earlier episodes), Amy finally got over her Raggedy Doctor to live with Rory, forever. How can someone close his / her eyes in front of such beautiful story telling. As far as The Statue of Liberty goes... that was totally cheesy and unbelievable... but it's also a Kid's TV show, don't forget anyone! So here we have another FEAR HER (you know, who I mean in this case...). All in all a very moving episode, that easily was the Best of 5 this year. But, Moff, don't forget, we don't want to bury all answers to some remaining and burning questions you raised over the last 2 and a half seasons. Imagine you sit in a talkshow, somebody asks you an important question about an arch or a character and you promise, answers will be given... how uncool would it be, if that someone (and especially let this be a child) doesn't believe you anymore... OK, that sounded harsh... but it's about the cracks and the beginning of this incarnation of the Doctor that I am still curious about and don't think, it's been nearly properly answered... And sometimes me likey answers... ;-) Hope all is well with everyone. I notice a lack of Merrick and MOV - and I see doctortom in full HAT mode. Sorry to hear, the actual season is not everyone's supper... but that's how I felt with season 5 back then. Had a hard time to accomodate to Matt Smith. After all, I came to peace with all of it, and as long as I had hope of answered question I took the ride. I surely don't regret it. And NO coming episode will be the last, if it doesn't meet my expectations. WHOREVER!

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 7:24 a.m. CST

    Gotta let some of the details go a bit...

    by DonnaTroyLost1

    As someone who has loved this show since 1982 (a wee 9 years old), I truly enjoy the show as it currently stands. I love the fact that my 12 year old and I can sit down enjoy it together and actually talk about it. But going into a show like this I truly don't believe you can pick at the strings too much. You look behind the curtain and the wizard is just a man with fancy lights. If you want to get truly nitpicky, then you have three specific problems not just with this episode but with DW in general: 1) The Rory/Amy/book go get them out of dodge thing. Just accept its an obvious Maguffin to get the plot moved along. It's no different than at the end of Nu Season 4 and they needed an excuse to keep Rose in the parallel universe but Mickey didn't need to stay. The actors are leaving, Moffat wanted them as characters to leave happy together and not let the Doctor brood on it for too long. A little ghost in the machine sure, but it hit the right emotional notes and the actors truly gave it all they had. You start going down the road of companions catching up with the Doctor at other points in his timeline and it just can't stop (depending on the timing, I believe we have stories between the show and books of at least three different incarnations of the Doctor on the Titanic, he is in London during the Blitz with Rose and Captain Jack at the same time Jack is in the Torchwood vaults, and roughly the same time he goes back in time in the Torchwood Series 1 Finale 2-parter.). We are going to have to accept that companions leaving not in death is almost always going to be awkward. For those who are old school Who, how many of the old companions leaving really worked? Liz Shaw left between seasons on a whim. Sarah Jane was dumped by the side of the road and essentially never got over it. Romana II basically gave the 4th doctor a big "I'm done with you I want someone different" attitude that was never seen up to the episode before she left. Nyssa decided to stay and help sick people when faced with staying and helping her own people on Traken in the wake of her father the King's death couldn't have cared less. I'm sure there are others I'm forgetting. 2) Fixed points in time can't be rewritten. The concept there is that the Doctor can't just be god of the universe. There are rules even he must follow at this point and if he doesn't there are consequences. You've seen this evolve throughout the new series due to the fact there was never that out there overall presence essentially cleaning up after the Doctor's mess (as it was implied the Timelords did often in the first 26 years). Again, you need internal rules for your show to follow, but this rule is still essentially being written on the fly. Since no one in our history is actually time-travelling, we are all working off theory anyway on how it works (please skip the Stephen Hawking or any other noted potential explanation. I'm sure there are plenty of truly scientific approaches to how it's done. Until we accomplish it, it is all theory and could be completely bonkers the same way scientists for years insisted we lived on a cube and the sun revolved around the Earth), so they are trying their own. Just follow along and enjoy the ride. 3) The Doctor erasing himself from history. Again a million problems here (He shows up in New New York in 4000 years after he is supposedly erased from time, the Timelords existed in the future we saw them, but now they retroactively exist no where, neither do the Daleks, except for the Hidden Asylum planet, and the Gallifreyan prison they threw out of the Time War that housed a million Daleks, and the Dalek Emperor's ship, but no he took out all the Daleks!, the fact that we see all of this from the Doctor's point of time reference, but the Daleks travel through time linearly along with the Cybermen, etc and they face 8 or 9 of the Doctors each. So now when Doctor 7 shows up to see the Daleks they don't know who he is? 4th Doctor is not a part of their beginnings on Skaro now? The walls crumble if you let them). Doctor Who will always have crazy continuity if it has any at all. Hit the big notes accept that he is a Time Lord that can go to (practically) any point in time and space, have adventures, take humans with him along for the ride, who will change over time. He will generally be force for good in the universe with bouts of self doubt and pity the same as other humanoid style creatures along with some actions that can be indescribably characterized as evil from that side of his personality. Sit back and enjoy the ride and don't sweat the details!

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 8:54 a.m. CST

    TATM revisited

    by veteran_of_mu

    Going in, as I said I really liked it. It left several big dangling threads - most especially the many Rory deaths - but it hit the emotions it needed to hit to make the Pond arc land. Plus I am an unabashed River fan and got my ya-yas. Except ... the idea that the Doc could read a book written by a character called Melody without the Ponds immediately thinking it was River, and the really horrible bit with the Doc whining for Amy to come back in the Tardis like he was a child wanting his mother. I have to agree with the HAT upthread by, I think, Perigee, that River's not upset because travelling backwards through time she knows full well she hasn't seen the last of her parents. What she doesn't know at this stage is how many more times she will see them. And ... if you freeze-frame you can see the person typing Garner's words is wearing red nail polish. I don't imagine Garner wears nail polish so I think he's just a fictitious character written by River - which is why his experience parallels Rory's.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 9:05 a.m. CST

    Really liked the episode

    by clupula

    This and The Power of Three were the only good episodes of the 5 so far. This has been a shitty season after how great Season 6 was. I'm sad to see the Ponds go, to be quite honest, but nobody stays forever and they had a fitting end. I STILL think they ended up raising River in NYC after he regeneration. Also, as for the Weeping Angels being overused? The show has been on for seven years. They've been in four episodes, two of which might as well count as one. We are not talking about the Daleks, who could use a several year vacation from the show.

  • Is he overused too?

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 9:23 a.m. CST

    The Ponds Are Already older than their 2020 selves

    by Jason

    The moment on the hill has already happened and has not been unwritten. The Doctor met Amy and Rory in 2010. The Eleventh Hour established that he returned for Amy 2 years later... "That was 2 years ago!" "Ooops!" The year was 2012 when Amy first started going travelling with the Doctor. A recent episode, might have been The Power Of Three, stated that Amy and Rory have been travelling with the Doctor on and off for 10 years. The Amy and Rory from the Angels in Manhattan were from at least 2022. No problem to solve. They were still at the hill in 2020.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 9:33 a.m. CST


    by DoctorTom

    I think he knew full well that it was going to be River, especially if you combine the cover with the name of the character. One thing to note - he takes his time reading the book, even reading it aloud, along with Yowzah comments. Normally he'll speed read through books, like he did in Time of the Angels (and in other stories such as, if I recall correctly, City of Death).

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 9:34 a.m. CST

    let me amend that slightly

    by DoctorTom

    I think he knew that River was the author if not the character herself.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 9:43 a.m. CST

    wtriker1701 - I'm still about!

    by Mister Vertue

    Taken on more work than I can handle recently so my time is even more precious than it used to be. I still check in with the Docbacks during my coffee breaks and such. You're all still on top form!

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 10:26 a.m. CST

    So, when the new companion comes in, will the show continue from 2022?

    by Royston Lodge

    Or will they simply retcon that shit to bring the show back in line with the actual date?

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 10:33 a.m. CST

    Good to know, MOV, you're at least still lurking!

    by wtriker1701

    And Who(!) am I to question your interest in the Docbacks... ;-) Don't I know, what lurking and reading without having the time to output anything means... being the rare one here... I also enjoy the discussions over here a lot. Interesting HATs, questions, Spoilers(!), banter... The Doctor is far away from being forgotten, no matter how hard he tries... ;-) BTW, question @all: Do any of you get the feeling, that there might a some kind of Big Bang 3? Where all the hidden information about The Doctor suddenly overwhelmes all his enemies...? In a Big Way?

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 10:41 a.m. CST

    It wasn't 10 years of our time...

    by DonnaTroyLost1

    It was 10 years in the life of Rory and Amy. A number of statements were made to notice that Amy and Rory were aging more relative to the people around them. Pretty safe to say that roughly its 3-4 years total of "our" time, though 10 years has passed for them. You want to stretch to 5 you can. The only absolute dates are the wedding Day, then the day the Doctor died in April of 2011. To say this extended to 2 years beyond that so we are at a 5 year state (First time was 2008, 2 years before June 25, 2010) Assuming Clara is not from this time period (judging by the promo), it isn't a stretch at all to pull her out of time, then have her be brought to 2013 to see technology, etc. . Then they can reset any future companion as from later in 2014 or whenever.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 11:56 a.m. CST

    donnatroylost1 & Looper

    by Mr Underhill

    Dear donnatroylost1, Can I say how MUCH I enjoyed your post above, and how much those sentiments echo my own. Too much analysis sometimes needs to be avoided. If people want a piece of entertainment that fails in the time travel stakes they really should go and see Looper. Although, like TATM, it hits some great emotional notes. In the case of Looper the causal connundrums are SO large that NY would have been blown off the map! M

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 12:28 p.m. CST

    wtriker1701 - interesting idea on the infobomb

    by DoctorTom

    it might not take a complete Big Bang though. Some broadcasts including some of the Silence saying *remember The Doctor* might be enough. Yes, it looks like the Doctor's being forgotten by a lot of people, but near the end of The Wedding of River Song that was an awful lot of messages coming in from the outside universe responding to the Doctor needing help - I don't see all of the people sending those messages forgetting.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 2:38 p.m. CST

    Why Rory's name was there and Amy's wasn't

    by chiwrtr72

    I took that to mean that Rory being sent back was a fixed point. Even when they paradoxed the hotel into nonexistence and thought they had won, Rory seeing his name showed that he hadn't avoided his fate. Amy's name wasn't there because she could have left Rory in the past all alone. Her name appeared because she chose Rory over the Doctor.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 3:07 p.m. CST

    banthabreeder egg

    by bongo dummy

    Didn't the Weeping Statue of Liberty have an egg shaped mouth? a ha! The closest thing to 'eggs' is there was you had winged creatures and cherubs that were referred to as 'babies' by that one guy. The cherubs were always gathered together like they were in a nest. That isn't odd considering how cherub statues/ornamentation usually has more than one instance.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 3:30 p.m. CST

    the ponds ended up when?

    by bongo dummy

    I know I presume that both Rory and Amy definitely ended up back in 1938 NYC but with the hotel destroyed and no proof otherwise, do we really know if they really ended up in that year? His tombstone said he was "aged 82" and that Amy was "aged 87". 1938 was 74 years ago, right? So, if the were around 30 years old and both were the same age that means: they were sent to separate times? Or both were 30 in 1938 and Amy died in 1995? Rory died in 1990? There's no definitive death dates or birth dates on the tombstones. Plus, even the newspaper wasn't exactly helpful at determining the date. In 'Let's Kill Hitler' I think newspapers were helpful. All we have is the two went to 1938 once with the Doctor and River. And, that they died at some point in time. But, we only know about how old they were when they died. Heck. Does anyone have that book? More than likely there is some made up date when it was first published. Maybe. Rats. I didn't log in confused but now there's questions.

  • Other than the fixed date of 1938 there's still missing information on when Rory and Amy lived the bulk of their lives.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 3:37 p.m. CST

    We don't even know that they were sent back to 1938 again.

    by DoctorTom

    We only know enough that, according to the tombstone, Rory was 82 and Amy was 87.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 3:39 p.m. CST

    Something else about the tombstones

    by DoctorTom

    We only had Rory looking at the one tombstone. it would be amusing if there were one tombstone for each time Rory died in the series.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 3:56 p.m. CST

    Pretty well done all around...

    by ProfWimsey

    That was a pretty good and pretty powerful departure for the Ponds. Amy & Rory really were excellent companions: in a way, they were a modernized version of the "paired" companions that Hartnell & Troughton always had. (And they acted like those companions probably would have: I mean, seriously, you know that Ben & Polly were banging each other heavily!) Seriously, I liked that we had yet another story concerning stored memories of things lost: that's as close to an "arc" as we are getting. In particular, it really worked as part 2 of a story with Power of 3 being part 1. The plot was a wonky one, but works once you understand that the Doctor is not (as some of us once believed) the leading edge of time. I particularly like that both the climax of the plot and the climax of the story were actively initiated by the Ponds rather than the Doctor. The Doctor's and Amy's parting was quite poignant, perhaps more so than the Doctor's and Rose's parting. I especially liked that River sided with her mother: River understood Amy's position because of her (River's) own relationship with the Doctor. Smith and Gillan (and the direction) were spot on there. And, in the end, I really like that we do not even know *when* Amy & Rory wound up. *Probably* they died after that cemetary got started: but, who knows, maybe they had their bodies moved to that cemetary!

  • Sure, he knew, but it seemed to come as a remarkable surprise to the Ponds. Which doesn't seem credible even given how callow they turned in the end. It may be that the two were just annoying the snot out of the Doc and all that "oh please Amy come back in the Tardis and we'll figure something out" was completely tongue in cheek. Bored Doc => Eject Companions Also ... we are having major characters jump off the roof. Where have we seen that before? And ... our hero makes everyone forget him. Where have we seen that before? Perhaps a certain show-runner is running his shows in circles?

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 4:56 p.m. CST

    doctortom - Very good one with the many tombstones!

    by wtriker1701

    And if there was one with a crack on it? Awwww - there would be some raising speculation.... Sorry, I didn't mean literally a Big Bang 3 - just the (I very much like your word for it) infobomb.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 5:40 p.m. CST

    Companion "offing"

    by Murphy7

    High water mark for impacting the Doctor and his travels by the end of one episode still has to the War Games. The Time Lords took both Zoe and Jaime away, and made certain they _forgot_ about their time with the Doctor, and then forcibly regenerated the Doctor before his exile on Earth. In a way, the Time Lords also brought about Sarah leaving the Doctor's company, but she had pretty well come to that decision on her own only to be disappointed to not get to see Gallifrey. Sarah might be a reach, and I am just famliar enough with the Colin Baker and Sylvester McCoy stories to know what happened to their companions. By way of comparison, the Cybermen aren't very effective, but at least I think we can thank them for Adric?

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 6:37 p.m. CST

    It's a bolt on tradition...

    by dj_bollocks

    That companions make some sort of return when the Doctor regenerates... I'm calling it now that the Pond's live happily ever after and are reunited with Brian...

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 6:59 p.m. CST

    Then why New York City?

    by bongo dummy

    I could see cliched reasons: do a period piece, the statue of liberty as a monster, etc. But, why have the Ponds die in NYC and presumably make live there if the goal was to not have them end up in 1938 America? If Melody regenerated in 1969 NYC, that would have made the Ponds in their 60s. Then there's the notion that their childhood was spent being around Melody. That should have occurred in the late 90s/the 00s, for sure. And, the more basic question: Amy outlived Rory so in the framework of the story, she dies alone? Whereas, in the first variation of Rory dying, he died alone. 30-something Amy shouldn't have been there. Also, if Old Dying Rory died in 1938 then he should have been zapped back further in time at some point. Cuz that geezer was ooooooooolllllllddddd! So, someone get to putting up a timeline of all the pertinent points. It will be quite an undertaking since you would need to consider this Doctor, River/Melody, Amy and Rory (all versions, no) Just the ones that survive. It would be cool to see when Rory died all those times. It should include a rough time line of when the 11th Hour began, remembering it crossed over with at least the Big Bang. fanzine/wiki folks or those who know of such folks need to get on it so that we can honestly tear it all apart.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 7:37 p.m. CST

    Something likely significant that hasn't been much discussed

    by glenn_the_frog

    The regeneration energy. 3 of the last 5 Mofatt stories were River based. (And much of last season including two parters). Now, ignoring the Dalek episode and the christmas episode, just for the sake of discussion. The three River based episodes, all written by Moffatt who has a long term plan. Let's Kill Hitler- Show's River's first meeting of the doctor, and her previous regeneration, and she gives ALL her regeneration energy to the doctor. Presumably, accompanied with little girl in New York, this accounts for all the regenerations River will have and we have her more or less complete timeline. Speculated by some that this could eventually be a potential out to get past the "only 12 regenerations rule". Also it covers the fact that River will die when she meets the doctor in her first meeting, since she has no regenerations (But the actual episode covered that too by saying the burnout would just kill the doctor.) Reiterates that a fresh regeneration allows some serious bodily harm like bullets (or a chopped off hand) without major consequences. Wedding of River Song- River and the Doc get married. Has river shooting the tesselect Doc and getting obviously staged fake regeneration energy and setting up the rule about being killed during regeneration. (Which goes back to impossible astronaut) ATM- River, for the first time openly and clearly referring to herself as the Doctor's wife and him as her husband, and for the first time showing concerns about aging (and very far along on her timeline, just short of silence in the library)... is given some new regeneration energy by the doctor. Now, this might just be a symbol of caring, husband to wife worry, just showing off that a timelord can do that for another near timelord... But here's my question. Why would Moffatt, in one story, make a very clear point about River using up all her regenerations, and introducing the shared regeneration ability... and then, a mere TWO stories later (River related anyway) then make a special point about giving some of that energy back? To the point that River even chastises him about it? In an episode that was completely filled with old ideas and conceits, which uses old ideas and complicate them even more, to the point where you really have to have seen most of the earlier episodes to follow a lot of the timeline, predestination, and paradox ideas presented, why would he bring up this particular idea again? So soon? And in such contradiction to what he himself already wrote? Just two stories earlier? I think he's blatantly setting something up right in front of us. Making a big point about being able to share regeneration energy to drive home it can be done... and making a big point about River very specifically having some of the Doctor's regeneration energy, not just her own (which she had exhausted before.) The question though is... to what end? I can't imagine it would be to undo the potency of the ending of Silence in the Library, but... what else could this very deliberate reveal, give, take back, and then reminder be for?

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 8:25 p.m. CST

    But River's life is not linear...

    by dj_bollocks

    She's supposed to have seen at least one other Doctor (or it's at least alluded to...) but she might just as well be Doctor Song the next time we meet her as opposed to Professor Song or anywhere closer to ending up in the library... Giving River some RegenPower (tm) might be a get out clause should Alex Kingston not want to play River forever (I don't really know why though - Moff should be able to work around a schedule), but she won't be getting any younger in real life... But it's the Moff, he'll probably make some of this shit up as he goes along...

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 9:10 p.m. CST

    well, regening River as is wouldn't fix anything

    by glenn_the_frog

    Since SIlence in the Library very definitely showed her death, and we've now seen the the body from before her current form... and also before she ever met the Doctor. Alex Kingston mode is the only one that knows him, the only one there is space to know (And I imagine there's only 2 or 3 main stories left with her to be shown anyway). The question is simply, why would Moff so deliberately and pointedly make a deal about regeneration sharing, to the point he showcased it twice before either actor's time was up, and after it had already been used to excuse both of the them? (No more for river, and future bonuses for the doc). There's a rhyme and a reason... you don't just have a scene like that for no reason, certainly not when it works against what you already did very recently.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 10:11 p.m. CST

    Whotininnies recording - Got Questions

    by Ken Plume

    Glen and I will be recording a new episode of Whotininnies tomorrow. If you have any questions you might want answered or any topics for us to discuss and debate, you can drop them to me via email at ken @ asitecalledfred .com. Odds are we'll probably also be discussing Vengeance On Varos, so be sure to send along a nice big bag of salt.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 10:38 p.m. CST

    Problem with the Statue of Liberty solved by perception filters

    by sunspot_mike

    The Doctor suggested that the Weeping Angels were using a perception filter when pretending to be statues in the Aplan Mortarium of Alfava Metraxis. However, he then dropped the idea, believing that he, his companions and the soldiers of the Church may simply have been a bit thick. (TV: The Time of Angels)

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 10:41 p.m. CST

    What I was trying to say was...

    by sunspot_mike

    (I used quotes for the Doctor Who wiki and that made the rest of my comment invisible for some reason, argh...) only niggle with the episode was that no one shit their pants that Lady Liberty had left her island. But if she had a perception filter that was established in a previous episode, that made it work. I wept like an angel at the end. Well done, Grand Moff, well done!

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 6:12 a.m. CST

    @kenplume - If you're discussing Varos,

    by V'Shael

    spare a second or two (if you can) to talk about Attack of the Cybermen and how it leads to the Varos episode, in particular the developing arc of Colin Bakers Doctor.

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 7:46 a.m. CST

    we don't even know that they're in there

    by Kathryn Gail

    We don't know the exact year(s) Amy and Rory were sent back to, as elwagnero points out, they may have had their bodies moved, in fact. . . we don't even know that they're in there. We just know they've been memorialized, but we don't know why. Was it because family and friends saw them die of old age, or did they just go missing (perhaps presumed dead in some catastrophe), or did someone (possibly themselves) send them the message young Amy and Rory needed to hear (much like the book), or one to throw them off track and take them away from the Doctor? Amy and Rory seem pretty gregarious in their non-Doctor lives (big wedding crowd, big anniversary party crowd) and while they don't have any winning lottery numbers they surely remember enough to, you know, invest in IBM before computers took off. They may have sent that tombstone message to themselves, knowing it helped them make the right choice and enjoy their old age.

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 7:56 a.m. CST

    in fact River. . .

    by Kathryn Gail

    . . .was, as a lot of us have pointed out, surprisingly unemotional about the whole thing, and what exactly she was up to back there in 1938 in the first place was never fully explained. Perhaps she knew the whole story and was back there on a visit to only-a-bit-older Amy and Rory, who were just off camera having a laugh and cry and a nice glass of wine to see themselves going through an ordeal they know they'll survive. We know Amy and Rory have visited themselves before, and we know River's good at keeping spoilers to herself (although not normally without saying "spoilers" to drive people crazy!).

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 8:10 a.m. CST

    *Spoiler Toy Review! Anti Time device*

    by Kevin Bolinger

    My friend JT Mitchell reviews the Anti Time device in the link below. There are a few hidden phrases that could be spoilers for where the show is headed, including possible confirmation of a few of our HATS! Spoilers below One of the hidden phrases mentions not only the Gallifreyan matrix, but also the Valeyard! So, perhaps Smith's Doctor is headed for that fateful split of personalities!

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 9:16 a.m. CST

    darthdevious - I wouldn't get your hopes up

    by Mister Vertue

    I'd say that toy was purely to cater to fans who can spot the references, as opposed to giving away clues for future shows. I'd treat it purely as a fun toy and nothing more than that.

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 9:43 a.m. CST

    Actually, River had some angst to her....

    by ProfWimsey

    There was distinct bitterness when she warns Amy not to let the Doctor see her get old. And the way she pounced to support Amy risking that the Angel would send her back to Rory had a poignant empathy to it: River understood her mother's circumstance in a way that the Doctor really could not and she knew that Amy had to take the chance. It really came across is "if I could somehow do that, then I would." Incidentally, I finally saw "First Night" and "Last Night" last night: I've had the BR since November but I never got around to watching the extras! Those shorts really do a lot to flesh out the Doctor and River. Oh, and those of you thinking that the Doctor's tuxedo in "Hitler" means that he must have been at Amy's wedding will learn differently! It seems that River means tuxedo time for the Doctor....

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 10:09 a.m. CST

    Regen energy doesn't change SITL

    by DonnaTroyLost1

    It was mentioned quite clearly that due to the nature of what was being absorbed and the speed of it, a Timelord wouldn't be able to regenerate in time to prevent their death (similar to the situation in IA where the "Doctor" was killed during a regeneration), which is why River chained D10 up in the first place. Sharing of regeneration energy is cannon. It was noted several times in the old series that additional regenerations could be granted (or forced/removed as noted in the War Games so first reference of this capability is back in 1969, with a follow up utilized to facilitate the regeneration for Pertwee/Baker in Planet of the Spiders). It was supposedly done for the Master also as part of the Time War along with being the subject of several novelizations over the years. If you assume this to be true and the Doctor absorbed additional energies as a result of the time war, then there is no reason to think that the Doctor can regive regeneration energy at a later date (perhaps he doesn't even realize he has it, to be discovered at Trenzalore or some other fixed point ;) ). River in SITL may actually have regenerations remaining, she just wasn't able to react in time the same way D10 wouldn't have been able to (oh and skip the "I'd sense a Timelord" reference from S3, that was an obvious internal story maguffin that needs to never be mentioned again. It's a throwaway line that never made sense even in the episode itself) Again, don't sweat those details. Just enjoy! And thanks Mr. Underhill

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 10:59 a.m. CST

    I'd sense a Timelord

    by clupula

    Always came off like The Doctor just talking out of his ass to seem more sure about something he wasn't. It seems pretty obvious that he can't tell a Timelord when he couldn't immediately tell Jackson Lake was a human.

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 1:19 p.m. CST

    Ken - Whotininnies

    by DoctorTom

    you can always discuss Rory finally embracing his inner South Park Kenny to know that he will die and come back with the paradox. Well, it's probably a better topic than if River Song met the 6th Doctor, would she burn his coat? or Who would win in a steel cage match between Snake Plisskin and Jack Burton.

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 1:37 p.m. CST

    The size and activity on this talkback prove that geeks rule AICN

    by letsfightinglove

    Won't see this many comments on the next rom-com review...hopefully.

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 1:40 p.m. CST

    Glenn the frog - River and regeneration energy

    by DoctorTom

    I think River still has regeneration energy left, or will have regeneration energy in the future. She talked about adjusting her age down just to keep people on their toes sometimes. It was a way of explaining how River looked younger in Silence in the Library, but I'd think that she'd need regeneration energy to make the age adjustments like that. The bit about the Doctor sharing regeneration energy by touch is new - despite the talk in the old series about being able to give the Master a new set of regenerations, they never showed anyone passing regeneration energy by touch. It does bring a new perspective to Last of the Time Lords. I would guess that even if the Doctor would have shared regeneration energy with the Master, him applying his will not to regenerate would still prevent the regeneration from happening. This would mean although River got upset with the Doctor about wasting regeneration energy on her, she wasn't upset to the point where she refused to get healed from it. As to what thie means, it's obvious that Moffat's hanging a lantern on this for later (or earlier, depending on how you want to look at things). River's comments about not letting the Doctor see you get old makes me wonder if we're going to see River regenerate sometime in the future, possibly by the Doctor sharing regeneration energy with her again. This doesn't mean that some time later she doesn't go back to the *classic* (I hate having to use asterisks instead of quotations) look of Alex Kingston. Now, when does this happen? It depends on how sneaky Moffat wants to get. It could be a later season 7 story or later. One other possibility, though, would be Moffat getting clever (which is why this might be the answer). Doc 11 travels back to the Library to right after Doc10 leaves, and gives regeneration energy to River to bring her body back. There could be two of her at that point (one physical, one in CAL), or maybe as part of the regeneration he has to download the consciousness from CAL. Either way, River is brought back from the dead. She can look like an older Alex Kingston at that point or another actress. Option 2 on the regeneration energy - River still has some and is going to have to share with the Doctor again somewhere (possibly on the Fields of Trenzalore at the Fall of the 11th). Will it be another regeneration into the same person like Journey's End? Perhaps. Personally, I'd rather see the Doctor help River regenerate at some point.

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 3:04 p.m. CST

    I think that River's arc will be contained within Smith's tenure

    by ProfWimsey

    Well, we know that it's D11 who takes River to Darililum (sp?), and although they obviously criss-cross in time, I strongly suspect that the River arc will be played out in Smith's time. He's talking as if he's planning on a 4th season, but I'd be surprised if he stays longer than that, so that probably means that it will be wrapped next year. Now, we might see River again: but it would be as just "single story" rather than part of some arc.

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 4:02 p.m. CST

    Moffat doesn't have to worry about the massive plot holes.

    by Octavian

    They are filled in here by the fans. Amongst all this conjecture one issue has yet to be addressed. Karen Gillan looked super hot in spectacles.

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 4:38 p.m. CST

    Toy HATs (+ spoilers) - calling out MOV

    by veteran_of_mu

    How did the QLA toy come into existence? Consider the amount of Who lore it requires. You have to know both the new and the classic shows completely to design that thing. Gallifreyan Matrix Interface for the Valeyard, Yeti and Metebellis ... and you have to grok a connection between clerics and angels in more depth than any of us here have ever done. Toy designers don't make this shit up. They had to get from someone with at least as much Who lore as all of us here put together. And there's really only one person on the planet who has that much Who lore. And we know his name. So that presents us with 3 alternative HATs. 176.1: The Moff is planning to build on the intro to AOTD with a full on time war. We know Daleks and Angels can time travel. We didn't know that about Cybermen - but they could easily become the thralls of a time traveller. I call this plausible no matter what MOV says. 176.2: The Moff dreamed up this thing just to make money. I mean ... the Valeyard in a mass market toy? But not the Dream Lord? Every Uber-Whovian in the world will want one. Oh, wait, that's like a few thousand of us at this point in time. The rest of the so-called Whovians are just kids who are perfectly happy using plastic sonics as light sabers and TV remotes. Toy makers make money by selling millions of bits of plastic that relate to real show elements - they don't do this to be the butt of some show runner's joke. So I call this one wildly implausible. 176.3: There is some evil genius toy maker some place with HATs far wilder than mine. I mean the Angel finger element is just genius, pure and simple. The evil toy maker is a deep Whovian who wants to change the course of the show by making toys that force the Moff to put in an enormous arc involving all the major DW races in an endless bitter time war against the Valeyard. And he's able to coerce a toy manufacturer into following his evil plan without the BBC interfering in his abuse of their intellectual property. Now you may call me a dispiracy theorist if you wish ... but I call shenanigans on 176.3. And I think that's all the HATs there can be on this. So, MOV, since you disbelieve 176.1, are you suggesting 176.2 or 176.3? Or do you hold some other HAT whose merest operational parameters I am not worthy to calculate?

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 5:12 p.m. CST

    Caractuspotts - Angels time travelling

    by DoctorTom

    We know thay can send people back in time, but can the Angels go forward in time at a rate any faster than mere mortals? As for some evil genius toymaker and everything else in it, you would have to reach Craig Hinton levels of fanwankery, and he's been dead for over 5 years so we know it wasn't him designing the backstory for it. I suspect 176.1 though might have some merit - after all, if the Daleks and Cybermen don't remember the Doctor, they'd probably just get on with their plans for universal domination rather than waste all their time thinking of ways to lure the Doctor into a new trap. Some of the details, though, might have been worked out by Moffat and Gatiss late one night at a pub, trying to top each other for what could be included that would get the fans drooling.

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 5:28 p.m. CST

    Working On The Night MOVs

    by Ken Plume

    Gee, but wouldn't a bit of a "Time War" with Daleks and Cybermen and Angels and Clerics - Old Who meets New Who - be *quite* the thing to kick off a 50th anniversary year? And considering the amount of time it takes to actually bring a toy to market, wouldn't it be awkward if the episodes a very important device (that would warrant a toy) tied into got pushed back due to scheduling, but you still had a toy on tight profit margins that couldn't just sit in a warehouse until the BBC eventually managed to air said episodes? Perhaps you'd even try to soften the spoiler nature by making what were supposed to be readily heard phrases into hidden secret phrases, because the tech was already worked out and, hey, the episodes will air eventually and it will all make sense.

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 7:06 p.m. CST

    Night And The Doctor...

    by dj_bollocks

    I wasn't aware of these... at all... I hope Merrick doesn't mind the linkage... Some of these are far too good to have just been DVD extras...

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 11 p.m. CST

    caractacuspotts , doctortom...

    by Kevin Bolinger

    Just wanted to say thanks for the HATs on this one...seems my joy and somewhat speculative meaning of the hidden phrases was just so easily shot down...MOV may be right, but some of us have been known to be right from time to time as well, so again, thank you, made me feel better. :)

  • I've been annoyed by some of Moff's habits since day one, and was never a fan of Karen Gillan (although she did improve a bit towards the end there). But the worst bit was reading some of the completely uncritical praise for Moffats obnoxious "look-how-utterly-fucking-clever-I-am" scripts. I can't help but get a feeling of unbearable smugness from the guys writing. I admit Moffat has come up with some interesting ideas, but his characters can be insufferable. It's a bit soothing to read thoughtful comments from people who at least acknowledge that things aren't entirely perfect. Makes it easier to accept the positive points about the show. Still think Matt Smith would be better served with a new show runner though.

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 9:17 a.m. CST

    Trying on darthdevious’ HAT

    by Faulkopf

    What if Moffat IS leading up to the Valeyard for the 50th anniversary? Perhaps Russell Davies has been involved in this story idea, as well. It would certainly explain some of the arrogant, selfish, and downright mean behavior we have witnessed from both the 10th and 11th Doctors. The Dream Lord becomes foreshadowing. If the Doctor’s dark side violently ripped itself free from him, it might cause cracks in time. The Valeyard might taunt River as the TARDIS explodes. All of the Doctor’s enemies might come together in an effort the defeat the evil Doctor who caused the cracks. Asking the question *Doctor Who?* on the fields of Trenzalore at the fall of the Eleventh could force the split which causes the mess. Benedict Cumberbatch has been cagey about his interest in Doctor Who. There have been rumors of his involvement, possibly as the Master, that have been denied by Moffat. I can’t think of a better actor for an evil Matt Smith or an evil Doctor in general. This is probably fanwankery. Cumberbatch would make a suitable big name addition for the anniversary, though. Perhaps the Time War is involved as well. An evil Doctor could certainly cause temporal problems. All of the past Doctors (who are able) teaming up to defeat an evil Doctor who was foretold by the classic series would make a nifty 50th anniversary story. Yeah, I know. It’s all rubbish. It has likely been discussed by you all before, and I just missed it. Good times, though.

  • Those Bonus features on the DVD are fantastic - but River's farewell to the Doctor should have been on telly. It would have been the perfect match of comedy meets drama. And no one can deny, River's been at her best in there. Also she would hve been give his sonic screwdriver et al... We would have had our answer to her fate within the TV show. Nevertheless - the Last Night one was pure gold. But... I hope, not evry answer we're still searching for ends up as a bonus feature (maybe even as an easter egg on coming DVDs...). Oh, what have I said here? Hopefully The Moff doesn't read this... ;-)

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 10:21 a.m. CST

    @Ken - a QLA 50th Wet Dream

    by veteran_of_mu

    Let's proceed down this QLA path a bit further. It's obviously all our wet dreams come true - and why not? Moff's a fan first and foremost and the only reason we have to worry is that S7 part 1 has been balls. Well, maybe moving all the filler episodes to this year was intentional - so that next year, with a WETA-funded S8 and Moff collaborating with Peter Jackson and Rian Johnson, we get the full-on supersized franchise that can finally set the mainstream world on fire. What would that look like? The big bad is the Valeyard a.k.a. the GangerDoc. He's smarter than the Doctor, better prepared, more ruthless, remembers all his deaths, and, via the Metebellis crystal, is able to invade the Doctor's dreams at will. Oh and River is actually his girl, not the Doctor's. A weepy and sleep-starved Doctor gets locked out of the Universe and has no recourse but to seek help from the one-heart-human Doc, enter David Tennant. Now to get a Gallifreyan Matrix Interface you pretty much have to have a Gallifreyan Matrix, and the only place you get one of those is Gallifrey. Which means the Time Lords are back, baby. Since we just got a Master reference and the last time we saw him he was throwing himself at Rassilon, it's not too big a stretch to imagine the Master restoring Gallifrey to reality in exchange for the Presidency. With Tim Dalton's Rassilon languishing in chains until being busted out of the Matrix by the Cybermen, who Rassilon upgrades with Tardis technology just to be really evil. Metebellis crystals could be used to sort out a lot of shit. Healing DoctorDonna for a start. Since Donna worked so well with Dr 10 she's a natural to back up the one-heart Doc in a spare-parts Tardis. Leave the real Doctor 11 locked out of the universe and have the one-heart Doc and Donna fight a Matt Smith Valeyard to a standstill until the sinister entrance of ... the Yeti. Not some old shag pile fluffy Yeti. The real bad metal bruiser Yeti we saw in Peter McKinstry's concept ( Let that bad boy tear a few cybermen limb from limb and you've got a credible threat along with a vehicle for the return of the Great Intelligence a.k.a House. And along with House comes ... yes, finally, the restoration of McGann's Doctor 8, who we last heard complaining of being stranded in House's universe in the ~impossible~ message cube. The only element required to complete the Wet Dream is the return of Tom Baker. But ... how?

  • when writing the show. You simply can't make the show for the vocal minority of hard core fans. You can't do it. That's a sure fire way to kill the show. It has to be written so that it will appeal to a broader audience. Stop using the excuse that Moffat is a fan, to indulge in insane speculation about the show or the 50th anniversary. As for forshadowing, I'm beginning to think that the one bit in the Angels two-parter, has broken every viewers mind. They're obessed with fore-shadowing now. Even though virtually no other consistant examples have happened. There's a lot of shoes in the air, but none have dropped yet. And now with the departure of the Ponds, many never will. (Rory's badge being a prime example) The Dream lord was a bit of pollen, in a one off episode. It wasnt foreshadowing the Valeyard. We should accept that, and try to enjoy the show for what it is, and not what it will never be.

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 11:36 a.m. CST

    Yeah definitely no Valeyard

    by ByTor

    That's just not Moff's style. Hey guys. Sorry I was away so long, but we got behind on the episodes. (The rule in our house is that we don't watch new Who until everyone is available, and it's been a busy time around here.) I thought the episode was overall a mess. Moff likes to play clever timey wimey games, which is fine in small doses, but he ends up inventing some peculiar rules to make everything hang together. The Doctor clearly believed he'd never be able to see the Ponds again, and that just doesn't make any sense at all. Still, looking forward to the new companion, even though Moff's Christmas episodes have not been good so far.

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 12:11 p.m. CST

    Shouldn't River already be off the show?

    by RobRed1

    The whole conceit is that River and the Doc meet each other in reverse cronological order. The Doc meets her on the day she dies. Every time they met, it was one visit earlier for her. At the end of the last Angels episode, he realizes they never kissed before. And then we got to HER creation. The first time she meets him, when she tries to kill him. Right? So when exactly does the arc conclude with them never meeting again?

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 12:18 p.m. CST

    It's not strictly reverse

    by ByTor

    They've called it that once or twice, but it's clear that they just meet in a random sort of order. The River from TATM was clearly later than the one in, say, Time of Angels (she's a Professor again).

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 1 p.m. CST

    robred-it's not 100% backwards

    by glenn_the_frog

    Her last couple meeting with the doctor (and his first couple) are in reverse order for whatever reason, but it's not a 100% rule. They've been meeting and dating on the side between episodes for instance... and if it was ALWAYS in reverse they'd have no need for diaries. The start and end is backwards, (and there may be a specific reason for that) but the middle is all over the place.

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 1:02 p.m. CST

    not to mention if they were 100% in reverse...

    by glenn_the_frog

    then there'd be absolutely no point at all to the wedding, now would there?

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 1:43 p.m. CST

    We still could get the rest of the dinner with River...

    by ProfWimsey

    The only thing that Night and the Doctor really limits is when River gets the screwdriver: it has to be from Smith's Doctor. That does not even preclude River from meeting D12, D13, D14, etc... (However, she's out of regeneration energy and the actress is not getting any younger, although she is getting hotter if you are a middle aged bloke like me!) Regardless, there is no reason why we could not get a story set immediately after (or even encompassing) that little interlude. After all, a date for the Doctor and River surely has to include something blowing up, right?

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 2:19 p.m. CST

    I still think regenerating into Kingston in LKH was a mistake

    by glenn_the_frog

    The actress in there that was Amy and Rory's childhood friend could have turned into another actress. Still said and revealed it was River, and that would then give the character infinite potential time. Long as there was eventually a segue into her being Kingston River, which we know is the last, (and with CG Kingston wouldn't even have to be around for it) it'd be fine, and there could have been years of random crazy woman showing up, being a friend or enemy, and never having any idea where she was in River's timeline. Then mid episode she gets killed and morphs into the previous actress for half the episode as the reveal... and thus the first appearance of the old actress is also the last. Not to mention the chemistry would shift depending on the actress and whatever regeneration the doctor is on... and as long as she only appeared maybe once a year it would be a long term part of the mythos without getting too old. Basically, exactly the reveal the did in LKH, only with the leeway to do it another 3 or 6 times. Then they went and had River in like 8 out of 13 episodes last year and chronicled her entire timeline more or less. I can understand Moffatt wanting to keep it contained into just a couple year period while he's running the show, and mostly to just one recognizable actress so to not confuse the audience or drag it out too long... but it does seem a bit of a waste when she could have been a long term Master style character. Unless there IS some sort of cheat in store with the regen energy being passed around... (I don't want to undo the ending of Silence in the Library, its too poetic... but after River was revealed as part timelord her potential just seemed so huge, I hate to see it contained.)

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 3:19 p.m. CST

    Here's a thought on River regenerating

    by DoctorTom

    maybe this is leading to her regenerating, but later on in her life for some appearances with the Doctor she wears a perception filter (and her mental self image is that of Alex Kingston, to explain her look inside CAL). There's a way of having the regeneration without having to negate Silence in the Library in the slightest. I still suspect though that Smith will get River to regenerate at the Library, though.

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 5:06 p.m. CST

    Challenging v'shael & bytor on the Toy HATs upthread

    by veteran_of_mu

    You guys don't believe in 176.1. So ... is it 176.2? 176.3? Or can you think up a simpler HAT of your own?

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 5:35 p.m. CST

    Can I just say...

    by cosmic_dolphin

    As there seems to be no Red Dwarf X thread.... Welcome back ...solid start...I laughed out loud plenty of times, and whilst it won't go down as a classic episode it definitely had it's moments. So glad they decided to make more, one happy dwarfer tonight.

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 6:04 p.m. CST


    by ByTor

    I go with 176.3. I simply don't attach any significance to the toy beyond the fact that it's a toy. I'm pretty sure Moff isn't sharing secret plotlines with toy manufacturers. :)

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 8:01 p.m. CST

    Red Dwarf X

    by HornOrSilk

    I agree. A good start. Reminded me of something we would have seen in Season 6.

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 9:14 p.m. CST

    Why bother regenerating River?

    by ProfWimsey

    The appeal is in Kingston's portrayal of the character more than the general aspects of that character. Moreover, the character is working because of her arc; once that arc is done, then she'll be just another character.

  • Oct. 4, 2012, 10:30 p.m. CST

    NEW Whotinninies

    by Ken Plume

    For those pre-new-Docback early birds... Whotininnies 15: Vengeance On Hiatus Ken and Glen decry ambiguity, partake of classic Vengeance, and hope you mind the acid bath. SPOILER WARNINGS all around.

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 3:02 a.m. CST

    @caractacuspotts - The toy design

    by V'Shael

    Without knowing exactly who designed the toy, I would say it's foolish to speculate. However, I would say that it's exactly the sort of toy that someone who had only a passing familiarity with the show might design. A really knowledgable fan would have known the D-Mat gun already removes people from the time stream. (Requiring the key of Rassilon to operate) In addition, just look at the three things picked for the Gallifreyan Matrix files - The Yeti, Metebelis, and the Valeyard. You could go to any Whovian convention and simply say "Pick a favourite monster from the early show" and you could have gotten yeti or Valeyard as an answer.

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 3:04 a.m. CST

    @caractacuspotts - The toy design

    by V'Shael

    Basically, I disagree with your initial assessment : that 'You have to know both the new and the classic shows *completely* to design that thing.' I think you could see the Angels two-parter, and know the Daleks and Cybermen, and come up with that gun. You certainly don't have to grok a deeper connection between the clerics and the angels.

  • in the angels take manhattan. does river song regenerate into Madam Kavorian.

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 4:45 a.m. CST

    River and Regenerations

    by HornOrSilk

    She might be able to control them more than the Doctor, and so might decide eventually to return to her "favorite" at her last regeneration.

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 5:09 a.m. CST

    Listened to Whotinninies

    by HornOrSilk

    I listen from time to time, not every one, depending upon what's going on at the time. I wanted to hear the reaction to Colin Baker. I'm glad you both appreciated him. Even before Big Finish (which has done him well), I've always felt a fondness to his Doctor. I understood, and do understand, some of the criticism (which you will understand after you see more; and for those who saw it in order beginning with Twin Dilemma, I think that just made it worse and people have a difficulty adjusting due to first impressions), but I've always felt Colin got hit with so much unjust criticism. His Doctor is brash, antagonistic, egotistical, and yet beneath all that, still a hero when push comes to shove. He, however, now revels in it in a way he never did before or after (Matt perhaps getting close before River talked him down). Vengeance on Varos is recognized as one of his better stories (many who don't like his Doctor appreciate this story, for example), so it helps you start on a good note. The stories which usually are put on the "plus" side for the Sixth Doctor are this one and Revelation of the Daleks (which is one of the most unusual Dalek stories, and yet fits with Matt's most recent one in some ways, which you will understand when you get a chance to see it). So, good to see you liked it.

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 8:57 a.m. CST

    No Friday Docback yet...

    by V'Shael

    So I was wandering through some of the old ones - in particular, the posts from back in 2011, where we were speculating on what would happen in 2012. (These speculations happening before the airing of Lets Kill Hitler - how long ago does that seem now, eh?) If you remember at the time, we had been told that there was no reduction in the number of episodes being made. Repeatedly. (Even though that wasn't really being questioned.) There were always going to be 14 episodes made for the seventh season. The big question at the time, (spurred, if you can cast your mind back that far) was from Danny Cohens press statements, regarding whether we would get a full season broadcast in the calendar year 2012. He said we wouldn't. This caused immediate uproar and backpeddling - first, because he blamed the success of Sherlock on the lack of a full broadcast season in 2012, then because Moffat didn't appreciate being hung out to dry like that. Then followed by hasty reassurances that the full broadcast series would happen in 2012. And of course, now it turns out the original unspun statement was correct. Though the actual reasons are still unknown at this time. Even though people who were reportedly in the know, insisted that we'd see a full contingent of episodes in 2012. Plus ca change, I guess.

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 9:03 a.m. CST


    by ProfWimsey

    does river song regenerate into Madam Kavorian.

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 9:09 a.m. CST

    On Colin Baker....

    by ProfWimsey

    Colin Baker actually *could* have been a good Doctor. His Stranger series let him play the lead role the way he would have played the Doctor (more like Pertwee than any other Doctor, but definitely distinct). JNT was the problem throughout the 1980's. He held firmly to the idea that TV audiences could not follow characters that were not absolutely static, down to the Doctor's "styles" (the prior 4 Doctor's had styles, not costumes, until Tom Baker's last season) becoming costumes. The quailty of the script writing was low in this time, but that was partially the fault of Douglas Adams and Tom Baker: those two so radically altered scripts in the late 1970's looking for laughs that a lot of the better scriptwriters quite writing for Who.

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 9:15 a.m. CST

    @elwagnero - River does not regenerate into Madame Kavorian.

    by V'Shael

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 9:20 a.m. CST

    the who is madam Kavorian question

    by popboy

    has been bugging me since her introduction.

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 9:26 a.m. CST

    madam Kavorian question

    by ProfWimsey

    Is there a "who is Madam Kavorian?" question? Unlike, say, River or the Impossible Astronaut, I do not ever recall this being an issue in one of the stories. Given that she is an agent for the Silence and given that the Silence wants the Doctor out of the way, there is no need for any more detail than what we've gotten.

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 10:02 a.m. CST

    by elwagnero

    by popboy

    ok thanks for.

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 10:10 a.m. CST

    are our posts getting truncated?

    by ProfWimsey

    A few posts seem strangely short and I just saw that one of my prior ones got truncated after the first line.

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 10:22 a.m. CST

    elwagnero-Why bother regenerating the doctor?

    by glenn_the_frog

    The appeal is in Hartnell's portrayal of the character more than the general aspects of that character. Moreover, the character is working because of his arc; once that arc is done, then he'll be just another character. See how that works? Regenerating into a new actor keeps the doctor fresh, and even his chemistry with existing companions and enemies new and different. River getting an occasional refresher would work the same way. If she stops saying "spoilers' and "hello sweetie!" she takes on a wholly different characteristic and approach... and a different river romancing a different doctor would be wildly different. Or the same river with a different Doctor. The chemistry between Romana I and Romana II, both of whom were with Tom Baker, was WILDLY different. Different personality, outlook, and interactions... but with the same base and backstory. the Master didn't change much until the New Series where he was basically just insane! Master, but... still different! River has the potential to be a long, long term element of the series, long as she isn't overdone (really one surprise appearance a season, or even every two, would be plenty after the arc is told.) She's the regenerating Doctor's Wife! That's hard to setup and unique and different within the universe. Ditto for the Master, though he didn't change much between his early incarnation.

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 10:27 a.m. CST

    elwagnero -posts being truncated... don't use quotation marks

    by glenn_the_frog

    The format for this messageboard is dumb. Quote marks will break a post. Sometimes on some browsers they get through, but for the most part... it breaks things. Mostly just try to make due with brackets or * symbols. It's inane, but it is how it is.

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 10:44 a.m. CST


    by ProfWimsey

    OK, that explains why a post got chopped after the line I quoted from a prior post!

  • Oct. 5, 2012, 10:49 a.m. CST

    The Doctor transcends the actors...

    by ProfWimsey

    .... although there obviously was a big concern about that when they changed from Hartnell to Troughton! Apparently at the time, many thought that it would not work. In River's case, I think that the best and most cinematic thing to do will be to tie her thread with Smith's. Simply keeping her around for the sake of doing so is just a bit too fan-fictiony for my taste.

  • Oct. 6, 2012, 1:20 a.m. CST

    There is no such thing as a hugely meaningful epsiode of DR. WHO.

    by Nintendarth

    It's a tv show. Can it ever be HUGELY meaningful? How about this for hugely meaningful - I dare anyone here to visit that site and then come back and tell me that this episode of DR. WHO is -hugely meaningful.- Wow. Someone really needs to put out a documentary just slamming the HELL out of the fanboy community, I mean really, like getting shots of them being shown footage of wars and famine and giving us a double-wide screen-shot showing them not reacting at all, then show them a picture of a Dalek and watch their faces light up as they say -Ooooo a DALEK!- and then put back images of people dying for revolution in small Eastern European countries and watch them go passive. Hook up brain monitors to them for the documentary and watch as their brain refuses to process real facts about the real world, historical information, say, about the Vietnam War, but then cut to a shot of a Dalek going Exterminate! Exterminate! and watch their brains light up, then go back to information about real-world events and watch their brains shut down. LOOK IN THE MIRROR!

  • Oct. 6, 2012, 1:23 a.m. CST

    My real hope, though?

    by Nintendarth

    I hope that whoever reads this thinks for just ONE SINGLE SOLITARY moment about people starving globally so they can enjoy their Dr. Who Christmas Special and that it takes a tiny shred of enjoyment out of the experience for them. Maybe that'll be what it takes for them to pick up the phone or go to the internet and start paying the tiniest shred of attention to reality. Maybe it'll create some kind of psychotic break for them from the insanity of their imaginary lives and they'll realize the fragility of human existence. Nah. They'll just switch over to STAR TREK.

  • I'm sorry if my words upset anyone. I'm a big fan of DR. WHO but I recognize that it's not HUGELY MEANINGFUL. I mean, it's a show. A tv show. it's fun. But with the holidays approaching, it just stands out to me that there are probably - in your own neighborhood - elderly people going to bed tonight without money for power to keep their houses warm. People are freezing to death. Your and my neighbors. And this is hugely meaningful? No. It's wildly fun, yes. Not meaningful.

  • I urge anyone who watches the Christmas Special to take a moment between commercial breaks to visit the 'net and find their local charity and give $10.00. It can make the difference of life or death for a senior.

  • They ARE hugely meaningful. There's more to Doctor Who than meets your eye.

  • Oct. 6, 2012, 7:24 a.m. CST


    by veteran_of_mu

    Star Trek and Doctor Who are escapist fantasy, sure. But they light the way to better ways of understanding and maintaining humanity. Picard's hyperbole about a world without money where people work purely to improve themselves and humanity may come true if technology can feed the world. The Doctor's hyperbole about intellect and romance over brute force and cynicism may come true if science can enlighten the world. It is a race, and these visions describe what might happen if we win it. That's hugely meaningful because it encourages people to work together to make it happen. Focusing on the terrors and horrors of the world around us, about which we can do next to nothing, means next to nothing. So by all means give to charity and do your best for the suffering children. But don't crap on our dreams of a better world. Without those dreams, that world can never happen. Wilde said we are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

  • Oct. 6, 2012, 11:32 a.m. CST

    Mirror, mirror, @nintendarth

    by Kathryn Gail

    A hugely meaningful show is one that lifts people out of their everyday lives and makes them feel like they can be strong, be visionary, and actually make a difference. History teaches us that everybody dies. A $10 donation to a major charity often barely covers the junk mail sent in return. Most documentaries are cranked out by media conglomerates to drive eyeballs to advertising every bit as much as fictional shows, only the fictional shows create communities that transcend the isolation of modern life and create jobs not just for a few executives but for people in publishing, conference planning, retail, equipment and software design, office support, and on and on and on. I can't really quibble with nonprofits' tearjerker shorts if they're what it takes for some people to figure out that poverty exists, but what's a better overall message, "feel guilty, blindly donate, feel guilty, blindly donate," or "step back from your problems, engage your mind, question details, connect with others, find your voice and your strength, and walk out into the world and accomplish something?" And sass me at your peril about the history remark; I read primary materials all day, and I'd long since have dropped dead of crushing nihilism without some debate-worthy escapism to remind me that my individual actions impact individual people moment to moment for as long as I exist. Mine do, yours do, George Entwistle's do, your elderly neighbors' do, and so do those of every support staff person who ever made a living helping to make possible any number of pop-culture phenomena that interested people in ideas that inspire learning that creates experts who (as one example) develop systems that allow (as one example) one person to tell off a worldwide community with just five minutes' fiddling with a keyboard--no printing costs, no fighting to gain public recognition, no real disruptions to your daily schedule. There are a lot of these long, winding thought exercises you can do while doing whatever it is that nudges you to introspect. Looking in mirrors. Walking in the park. Yes, absolutely--googling your local charities! And watching shows. It's a show that has us all gathered here listening to you in the first place.

  • Oct. 6, 2012, 6:47 p.m. CST

    My two cents on the Ponds ending..

    by JonBrad

  • Oct. 6, 2012, 6:53 p.m. CST

    Ooops..pressed enter by accident

    by JonBrad

    I agree that, yes, The Doctor could go back and see them. However, the fact that they died at a certain time and probably at a certain location makes it impossible for The Doctor to change the inevitable outcome (fixed point and all that). COULD he visit them? I think so. Would he want to , knowing what kind of sentimentalist he is, probably not.

  • Oct. 8, 2012, 11:56 a.m. CST

    Nitendarth - There aren't any 'adverts'

    by cosmic_dolphin

    It's a BBC show. We pay a TV licence. So there won't be any adverts. Also we pay taxes which funds the Winter Fuel Allowance paid out by the Goverment to keep the elderly warm each Winter. And a chunk of those taxes also go to overseas aid. So I will tell you the same thing as I told the nice lady who tried to engage with me on the doorstep when collecting for floods in Pakistan or wherever it was. No Thanks :)

  • Oct. 8, 2012, 12:25 p.m. CST

    In belated defense of Nintendarth's statement...

    by ClaireRedfield

    I tell this story a lot. When I was a kid I was in a comic shop and overheard the guy behind the counter (who was also the owner) talking to another customer. I had never heard the word nigger said so many times in a single conversation. I was shocked to hear someone using that much hateful language in what I, in my young naivete, had always thought of as a pit-stop for the future great thinkers of the world: the comic shop. I couldn't wrap my head around how someone who obviously loved comics could be so blatantly racist. I mean, they spent so much time preaching against discrimination in comics even I got sick of it. Acceptance of others, progressive thinking, optimism about the future of mankind, faith in both love and science, all that good shit; all in comics, all the time. But it just seemed to have completely missed a man who loved comics enough to run a store that barely turned a profit every month. I learned then and later on in life that regardless of how profound and affecting and intellectually stimulating you think any work may be, someone else may not get any of that from it. To them it's just pretty pictures. My point being that while I personally have been totally enriched and positively influenced by my many "frivolous entertainments", I can totally understand Nintendarths frustration with someone calling Dr. Who "hugely meaningful". All you have to do is run into a couple of Who fans who are complete and utter cunts and that shit is called into immediate doubt. It's all about perspective, I guess.

  • Oct. 8, 2012, 2:44 p.m. CST

    I'm not sure I get Nintendarths argument.

    by Timmid

    He seems to think that people who think Dr Who, wrongly in my opinion, is something deeply clever and meaningful are in some way disenfranchised from real life. One of my close friends is a mad Dr Who fan, who will, a bit like Hornorsilk, draw all types of meaning and depth out of the silliest of nonsense. Trouble is I can't take the mickey out of him all year around because he spends months of the year doing charity work in some of the worst hot spots. Go figure hey 'darth. Doesn't quite tie up with your simple view of the world.

  • Oct. 8, 2012, 8:57 p.m. CST

    Thanks, Claire & @timmid

    by Nintendarth

    Claire got my point precisely. Timmid, there's nothing wrong with using sci-fi to draw deeper meaning into real life (I do it all the time and think it's the POINT of the best STAR TREK episodes). What I found offensive was the idea that the EPISODE ITSELF was somehow hugely meaningful. I was unaware there were Christmas Specials for Children's welfare. Awesome. I know about the TV license, but when I was in London recently there was still a middle break to advertise other BBC-TV shows. That's what I was talking about.

  • Oct. 9, 2012, 1:37 p.m. CST


    by Stegman84

    To be brutally honest, people like you irritate the absolute hell out of me with your holier than thou attitudes and forced self righteousness. I see it all the time of late, and it drives me crazy. You're actually worse than the (really fucking annoying) fans who take everything so seriously that it borders on some kind of mental instability. We all know those kind of fans, the ones who can not accept any view that differs from their own without launching some kind of verbal jihad, and who are obsessional to a frankly creepy degree. A very loud, yet actually tiny, minority, and one that has only been given even greater voice in this internet enabled age, unfortunately. They are the kind of self-labelled superfan who at times can almost make you hate something you actually love, just because you don't want to be in any way associated to that kind of person. Thing is, most fans aren't like that at all. Most fans are just normal folks who just so happen to enjoy a particular thing, and enjoy talking about it with other like-minded, non borderline personality disorder, people. They aren't creepy or weird and aren't damaging society or the world in any way, they are just taking part in a shared interest with other folks of their own ilk as opportunity, and real life, allows. They have normal lives and normal jobs and normal families, they have their own set of human flaws and their own set of strengths, and few of those, if any, have anything to do with the fact that they love a particular tv show or whatever else their interest(s) may happen to be. Regardless of what typical hollywood stereotyping may say on the matter. But people like you propagate a line of bullshit that seems to trumpet the notion that if only a certain targeted subset of people didn't actually take time in their lives to enjoy something, or even to draw inspiration from it, then suddenly the world would be a better place, free from wars or famine or injustice or poverty. Like how dare somebody take some degree of interest in something frivolous that brings a sliver of joy or happiness into their lives. And then to talk about it to boot with other like-minded souls. What selfish bastards! Dreams matter. Fantasy matters. Escapism matters. Being inspired and engaged matters. Getting through the day to day grind of life isn't always easy, and anything that can even bring a sliver of hope or light or enjoyment into one's life, that is a good and worthy thing. It doesn't mean it is the most important thing, it may not be your thing, and you may not see any great importance in it yourself, but nor is there any reason to piss all over it just because someone else sees something of worth that you yourself don't. And yet what are you doing? Are you out there doing charity work with your spare time? Are you drumming up support for righteous causes that you believe in? No, from all available evidence thus far, you are spending your spare time going out of your way to do little else than throwing out lazy guilt trips at people and sitting in judgement of people on a message board that is clearly dedicated to a certain fandom, and trying to make said people feel bad about something they happen to enjoy. And for no other reason, and with no other justification, than, apparently, because it doesn't match up to your personal awesome tickbox of absolute worthiness versus certain real life issues and injustices. I mean what gives you the right to judge anyone on what they should or shouldn't find worth in, or draw inspiration from? The arrogance of that is just mind boggling, even putting aside the holier than thou guilt tripping. And that's why people like you are, to my mind, even worse than the worst of deranged superfan. Because they are pretty easy to spot and ignore, but you, you actually go out of your way to try and make people feel bad about something that does no harm and makes them feel good. Because you try to pile a level of guilt right on top of someone's harmless enjoyment. Because you propagate such sheer and utter idiocy as linking two disparate and completely separate things, like old people freezing or children starving, to people possibly drawing some level of inspiration or meaning from a tv show, as if to say to stop doing the latter would be of any help to the former. You're a holier than thou guilt monger in a land where no particular and immediate guilt need apply. And perhaps, even worse, you seem to do so for no other reason than to make yourself seem enlightened and better than everybody else, because, hey, look at how much you really care, bringing up such important issues out of the blue, unlike those stupid uncaring fans in a fan space talking about fan related things. You try to sell the illusion of being an activist without ever having to take any action yourself. And then you judge others, who you don't even know, for their own inactions, of which you have neither proof nor knowledge, with the prototypical fanbaiting guilt trip diatribe. And frankly, I think that is just a fucking shitty thing to do to people, not to mention grossly insulting to use such important social issues as a weapon to attack harmless fandom pursuits in a space specifically set aside for discussing such. It is not that the issues that you use are not important, they are greatly, hugely important, it is that they have nothing at all to do with the subject at hand, and using them as a weapon in order to attack fandom of any kind with is pretty damn offensive, not to mention demeaning to just how important these issues actually are. And I am so sick of people using such issues as little more than blunt forced weapons to attack others with in order to make other people feel bad, while making themselves feel good. It sickens me to be perfectly honest. I'm sorry for the rant. I'm sorry for any offence I may cause with it. And I am willing to accept any consequences deemed necessary in regards to anything I have posted. But this kind of thing just drives me crazy, it really does.

  • Oct. 9, 2012, 1:38 p.m. CST

    @nintendarth: I see decaf in your future...

    by obijuanmartinez

    Been watching "Dr. Who" for +30 years, since it debuted on PBS in the late 70s - it had a similar effect on me that seeing Star Wars in the summer of 1977 did. I consider them both hugely meaningful. That said, my family runs a non-profit charity in Philadelphia, and our activities are also hugely meaningful (We'd like to think so anyway...), but in a completely different way. You're essentially comparing apples and oranges, old son, and attempting to belittle / mock fans by taking some sanctimonious view of them that really makes no sense...

  • Oct. 9, 2012, 10:39 p.m. CST

    Doctor Who is HUGELY meaningful

    by sunspot_mike

    That's the whole point of art. Whether it's a TV show or a song or a movie or a novel or an Internet meme - art is turning something ugly into something beautiful. We love Doctor Who because it connects with us. Yes, it's not the REAL world and that's why we love it. Art isn't supposed to be the real world, it's supposed to help us understand the real world more with fucking MEANING. There are horrible traumas and tragedies in the world, but art helps us understand them. Yes, there are millions of children that need to be saved, there are diseases that we need to fight, there are problems that we all deal with in our families and our friend circles that we have to conquer. But the whole point of art is to comprehend them better! To filter them through something that makes sense, through something that we can process and thereby go and act better in our lives. If you don't find something meaningful in it, DO NOT DARE to try to say that I don't. This isn't some altruistic pissing match where we can see who does more charity, it's about understanding life better through the human creations that we cherish. The Doctor has made me more patient with my friends, has helped me see things in other people that I otherwise would have never seen, has made me give people a chance when I otherwise wouldn't. My love of Doctor Who has made me friends in places I never thought I would have. So, please don't try and act like just because we love a TV show and find something deeper within ourselves through it, that we're not contributing to society as a whole. Charity is wonderful, but it begins at home. And if a single piece of art helps us do more of that, then it's serving its greater purpose. Your trolling does not.

  • Oct. 12, 2012, 7:48 a.m. CST

    Wanna know what happened to Amy, Rory, and Brian?

    by Royston Lodge

    BBC has released the storyboard of the scene that they never shot. Get out your hankies, it's a tear-jerker!