Dr Who Season Finale

[Stark]

It's almost like obsessing over dialog is a stupid way to analyse scifi.

And tbh the new show broke its own idea of personal consistency pretty early on; it makes sense for people not to be able to cross their own timelines, but not being able to cross the timeline of another unrelated time traveller? Why not? Reducing it from a complex sense of how events inter-relate and how much stress your own personal web if time can handle to a mechanical switch is just par for the course.

And isn't fanrage at writers really unrealistic? Doesn't the show rate very highly?

[mr friendly guy]

1. More of the Doctor being alone wah wah bad wah bullshit
2. Breaking the rules of angels with line of sight bullshit
3. The Doctor going all emo to showcase how tragic this is, instead of you know, actually resolving the stuff. Can you imagine classical Who having the Doctor doing this, instead of finding a solution.
4. River Song. Enough said. Anything with her in is now becoming self indulgent, unlike her first appear in Silence in the Library.
5. They tried the clever trick of communicating via messages left in historical artefacts, books etc. However that worked in the first appearance of the Weeping Angels because the Doctor and Martha were trapped and had to communicate via such means to the humans helping them. In this one, the Doctor is an active player so to speak.
Again they focus on character show pieces at the expense of plot. Old Who had both.

I will give it good points because the writer also had the same idea I had when confronted with what seems like inevitability, ie Rory would die at that time in the building. Kill yourself and break the cycle. It doesn’t seem as clever or glamorous as coming up with a super smart way to cheat death, but in my mind it’s the shortest path to break the inevitability of the future. This of course does not save the episode in my mind.

[Eternal_Freedom]

The only upshot is that River identified herself as a Professor. Hopefully this means she's nearing the end of her arc and will soon be off to the library planet and her death. About freaking time too.

[mr friendly guy]

I am giving this 2 out of 5. If there was a way to sum up the first half of this season, it would be "not even worth pirating".

[RileyManheim]

I think they need to replace the doctor & the writers ASAP or this will be the last or next to last season at this rate.

Unless the remaining half of the season suffers a total ratings collapse, that's highly unlikely. Hell, even if that did happen, all that would result is that Moffat would probably be fired after the 50th anniversary story.

...

Well, let me put it this way, unless the Christmas special is SUPER AWESOME!!!!!!!! (5 of 5), I'm probably going to stop watching immediately after. The only reason I'm not going to quit watching already is I'll probably forget how annoyed I am by Christmas. Right now, if there was another episode next weekend...I wouldn't even bother.

So ya, if they continue with this quality level I expect the ratings to have collapsed by next season sometime.

[Crazedwraith]

So ya, if they continue with this quality level I expect the ratings to have collapsed by next season sometime.

If they didn't collapse after last season, I don't think there's much chance of it going down this season.

Remember even if we hated it, we're not really representative of its main audience; kids and their families. Even if we all stopped watch it, and we probably won't, if just to know what to complain about, it might not have that big an impact on the show's ratings. And even then, have you seen the poll results? two-thirds positive. (3-5/5)

Anyway, personally I think most of the episodes have about the same quality as last year, they're just not being overshadow by the awful 'we're going to kill the doctor for realsies!' plotline.

[Havok]

Man, I thought people got all shitty about Star Trek and Star Wars.

Alright so I have this on Zune, so I watched it a few times. A few things:

Line of sight: There is no specific scene where the 'rule' is violated horrendously as people are whining about, and on the few instances there are...

Solving Line of Sight: As there are a fuck load of Angels now, if they get stuck, their pals can just come up behind them and cover their eyes until the one that is stuck is safely away and rinse and repeat. The reason that trick worked in Blink was because there were only four Angels (even though the Doctor referred to them as Lonely Assassins, although not really so lonely when it suits them) and they had no help in the room, however...

Lights: Unless everyone is closing their eyes when the lights go out, clearly it is not just line of sight but actually being able to SEE the Angels that freezes them, so yes, when the lights go out, even when they are stuck looking at each other, there is no reason that shouldn't free them. IF IT DIDN'T then they wouldn't be able to move when the lights went out either because they would have their hands uncovering their eyes. Even in Blink this is true, despite what the Doctor says, if it weren't they would never be able to move in groups, but since the first show they appear in clearly shows them doing so, obviously the "quantum lock for eternity" thing is wrong. That or they have zero and I mean ZERO peripheral vision. We are basing what we know on the Angels on the Doctor's knowledge (dialogue), and obviously as we saw in The Time of Angels and Flesh and Stone his information is incomplete and still growing. (He didn't know about the images of Angels until he read about it)

As Stark said, it is not about dialogue, but what we observe as what we should take as what is correct.

Statue of Liberty: Hokey? Yes. How does it move? How do any of them move? They are all made of stone, literally made of stone, so why is a small statue moving fine, but a big giant one not? How does it become an Angel? Perhaps a regular Angel can take over stone forms. I mean if they can be a live CCTV image, I'm sure they can manage a big statue.
The only irreconcilable issue is the pictures people take of statues in New York and obviously the Statue of Liberty, and there is probably never a point when someone isn't looking at the thing or won't happen to notice it wandering around lower Manhattan.

Rory: Rory doesn't disappear because he sees his name on the grave stone, he disappears because the Angle that survived the paradox event sends him back to 1938. You could even say if you want that Rory seeing his own tombstone before time caught up and deleted it allowed the last Angel to survive the paradox event and thus created the fixed point that the Doctor can't screw around with, which is exactly what he said would happen when you read your future. Obviously Rory died in New York, but that doesn't mean he stayed in New York by any means. Just that his resting place is there. The Doctor has always been correct about these things even if he was wrong about exactly what the fixed point was at first glance. (Pompeii and his "death")
Also, bear in mind while ages are on the headstone, no dates are. There is nothing there that indicates that Rory actually went back to 1938, the only times that are actually fixed is that Rory died before 2012 and that the EVENTS of the book happened in 1938 that is not when the book is published. (Amy pulls the date out of the middle of the book, not the copyright or publishing dates in the front or rear)

Amy: Amy always knew the Doctor would come back to her and she kept it a secret since she was a little girl. It completely explains how and why she acts the way she does with him.
The second visit to give her hope also explains her adamantly believing in him until he shows back up, despite everyone saying she was crazy.

As to when Amy died or when she went back in time to, keep in mind that 1938-2012 is 74 years. I'm pretty sure Amy wasn't 13 (in fact she should be over 31) when she went back in time so it was further than 1938 if she was 87 when she died. If she had gone back in time to 1938, based on her approximate real age, she would have died in 1994 living 87 years. If she died in 2012 and that was a fresh grave and she used her real age (1989-2020) then the earliest she could have gone back was 1925. I doubt from the look they tried to convey that it was a fresh grave and it looks like it was meant to be much older.

River also visits her to deliver the message to write the afterward to the Doctor, so it's not like she or Rory are trapped in something no one can visit.

New York: Don't be stupid people. HE IS IN NEW YORK. Obviously he can go there, just not to 1938 and possibly just back in time to that point or around it. Doc10 is also covered because he was there BEFORE the paradox in his own timeline. Doc11 also went there before the paradoxes in his own timeline.

River Song: Gah, I really don't mind the character or the interaction or the stories, I just really, really, really don't like the actress in the role. And yes, since she is no longer in custody and a Professor, she is getting close to the end of her 'life'. I imagine they will keep her around until Matt Smith departs the role though.
However if she is a Professor now, he shouldn't be this familiar with her because they are going in opposite directions.

[weemadando]

I think my biggest issue isn't that somehow the Statue of fucking Liberty is angel-fied as that's not the part that's stupid.

The part that's stupid is A) that it's able to move at all and B) When it does get frozen screaming at a building or whatever that the entire fucking city doesn't lose it's shit.

I mean, seriously, did no one in the whole of New York notice the statue going Demonic and attacking a building?

And what's worst is that it's unnecessary. There's no reason for it to be there except as a cheap shock moment. That they then repeat, shot for shot later in the episode.

[Thanas]

I think the show has been on a slow descent from somewhat silly but still great sci-fi storytelling it was in RTD's first season to glorified kids show.

[DarkSilver]

Concerning the "Fixed Point" and the Doctor not just going back to see Rory and Amy at another time.

He can't for a simple reason: He knows they never saw him again. It's the EXACT same reason 10 didn't go back for Madame de Pompadour in "Girl in the Fireplace".

The reasoning for this: the chapter titles. The one where he sees before River breaks her wrist to get out of the Angel's grasp - "Amelia's Final Farewell" (or something like this). He can't go back and see them without it causing a paradox again - because this was the last time they'd see him. Because in his "present" their new "future" they never met the Doctor again and thus the chapter title.

The fact he will never see them again is a fixed point in time for him now. He read his future, and that is how it happens.

[2000AD]

Concerning the "Fixed Point" and the Doctor not just going back to see Rory and Amy at another time.

He can't for a simple reason: He knows they never saw him again. It's the EXACT same reason 10 didn't go back for Madame de Pompadour in "Girl in the Fireplace".

The reasoning for this: the chapter titles. The one where he sees before River breaks her wrist to get out of the Angel's grasp - "Amelia's Final Farewell" (or something like this). He can't go back and see them without it causing a paradox again - because this was the last time they'd see him. Because in his "present" their new "future" they never met the Doctor again and thus the chapter title.

The fact he will never see them again is a fixed point in time for him now. He read his future, and that is how it happens.

It's a chapter title in a book, that's all. We clearly see Amy writing that after word and she doesn't look any older than when they left, plenty of time for him to go back after they write the book. We also know that the fixed point in time malarky is bollocks as:
- They read Rory's gravestone, no mention of Amy. Then she goes back and it's changed. So much for reading something making it immutable.
- The entire last season was about changing a supposed fixed point in time which was resolved when the fixed point turned out to not be what they thought it was ( a running theme of these so called fixed points, like the Pompei volcano).
- The time lord victorius speech from Waters of Mars and the surrounding event. Mars Commander lady was meant to die on Mars, fixed point, instead she commits suicide on Earth.

The only fixed point we have is that there's a gravestone with Rory and Amy's names on it, that's it. That could have been placed there any time, there could be anyone under there. If The Doctor can get the intergalactic time police people to lend him their artificial body robot to fake his death I'm pretty sure he can find someone to make a gravestone to preserve his past self's perception of this supposed fixed point.


-------

Tangent:

I'd actually like to see all these fixed points in time plots and Dark Doctor plots (Time Lord Victorious, Dream Lord etc.) come to a head with an actual guarenteed fixed point in time being subverted. The fixed point: River's death. Have River mention she's been hired to go to The Library, have an episode where the Doctor takes her to that place she mentioned, gives her his screw driver and says goodbye without giving anthing away, really play up that he knows this is the last time he'll see her and then at the end of the episode she walks back in through the Tardis door saying his younger self was dreamy (Bonus points for Dctor going "What?!" like he did when Donna first teleported in and the Titanic burst through the wall). Cue a season of Doctor trying to figure out what the hells going on with a whole bunch of tragic fixed points in time becoming more positive, culminating with him finding out the big bad is his future self (Valeyard maybe?) going full on "I am the Lord of Time, paradoxes can suck it!"

[DarkSilver]

It's a chapter title in a book, that's all. We clearly see Amy writing that after word and she doesn't look any older than when they left, plenty of time for him to go back after they write the book. We also know that the fixed point in time malarky is bollocks as:

Actually, earlier in that scene (where he reads the chapter title and then reacts to it, telling River to free herself without breaking her wrist) he says what the chapter titles are - a spoiler free preview of what happens in the chapter. By reading the chapter title, he made the point become what it was. We don't know what's really in the last chapter - without having a copy of the text for us to see, we ONLY have the assumption of the chapter title meaning Amy goes bye bye permanently at that part.

- They read Rory's gravestone, no mention of Amy. Then she goes back and it's changed. So much for reading something making it immutable.

That's because at the time - the events were still unfolding. The "Fixed Point in Time" only truly occurred after Amy herself was transported to the past to be with Rory. At that point, the "Amelia's Final Farewell" came to be - when she said "Good-bye Raggidy Man". that's it, fixed point in time. That becomes absolutely final when Amy writes her afterword to him. Maybe it's a leap in logic for me to assume it, but it makes sense.

- The entire last season was about changing a supposed fixed point in time which was resolved when the fixed point turned out to not be what they thought it was ( a running theme of these so called fixed points, like the Pompei volcano).

Last season was about us learning how the Doctor SUBVERTED what was meant to be a fixed point in time before it was even set in place. The Doctor played to the Silence's tune - bringing him to Lake Silencio where he was shot - twice. What we saw from the beginning was the Doctor in a Doctor Suit being shot by River.

The Doctor himself never actually was the one who got shot or died on the beach.

- The time lord victorius speech from Waters of Mars and the surrounding event. Mars Commander lady was meant to die on Mars, fixed point, instead she commits suicide on Earth.

This is a important part - we learned something from the Time Lord Victorious - Fixed Points will occur. You may change the past in little ways, but the big ways will occur - the details may be off, but they will still happen. The Commander didn't die on Mars - instead she committed suicide on Earth to preserve the fixed point.

This is a similar case as with "Girl in the Fireplace" (Tennant Doctor, Series 2 episode) - Why doesn't the Doctor use the TARDIS to go back in time to get Madame de Pompadour before she died after he learned she died? Because she never saw him again. In that brief instant it became a fixed point in his own timeline, that they never met again.

It's the EXACT same thing with Amelia. Once he read the afterword, it's a fixed point for him. He knows his future is without Amy from then on, and thus, he can't go back to get her again. Or that's at least how he rationalizes it to his own mind.



I'm not sure if that reads properly, it's more a ramble thought that's going through my mind as I watch it, and it makes sense to me anyway.

[The Imperator]

Havok, I really like your analyzation. I wish there was a way to favorite posts.Same goes for DarkSilver and 2000AD's Valeyard/Dream Lord idea.

[Scrib]

It's the EXACT same thing with Amelia. Once he read the afterword, it's a fixed point for him. He knows his future is without Amy from then on, and thus, he can't go back to get her again. Or that's at least how he rationalizes it to his own mind.
---

Yeah, it all depends on when the book was written. If it was written immediately after Amelia was zapped back, then it's not really accurate at all.

[Crazedwraith]

The 'i read it in a book that makes it fixed' shtick was such bullshit. It's not the same thing as Madam Au Pompador at all. At least in that case they had the fig leaf the TARDIS travel seems to lock the Doctor's timeline in place. (that's why he can't find a problem, then go back x time to fix it before it arrives.)

In this case its a book. Anyone could have written anything in that book. It doesn't make it true. The only thing that makes it so, is the Doctor beieliving in it. The wrist thing especially. The dialogue implies he could have easily broken the angel's wrist and freed River. He only didin't because of the book reading. Then he demands River change the future. In a way they did. Instead of Doctor breaking her wrist, River does. The details change the results stays the same.

Hmm, perhaps thats an intentional microism of the episode as a whole?

[DarkSilver]

The Doctor demanded River get free of the Angel without breaking her wrist. That would have been the change in the future. He knew the minor detail of who broke the wrist would be changable, but the fact that the wrist being broken is how she was freed....

If she could have changed that, then the book didn't give the account of the future as being perfect. When he sees River free and she says she didn't break the wrist, that's him thinking the future in the book isn't set, and thus the chapter title can be changed.

Notice when he grabs River's wrist and it's obvious she broke it to get free, how does it make him react? He realizes the book is giving him his future. And it's a book written by River, sent back to Amy to publish with her afterword.


But yes, the details can be changed (this episode confirms what we saw in "The Waters of Mars" with the Time Lord Victorious), but the major points WILL occur.

How did The Doctor himself put it in that episode "The story is the same...just the details are a bit different."

[Crazedwraith]

The Doctor demanded River get free of the Angel without breaking her wrist. That would have been the change in the future. He knew the minor detail of who broke the wrist would be changable, but the fact that the wrist being broken is how she was freed....

If she could have changed that, then the book didn't give the account of the future as being perfect. When he sees River free and she says she didn't break the wrist, that's him thinking the future in the book isn't set, and thus the chapter title can be changed.

Notice when he grabs River's wrist and it's obvious she broke it to get free, how does it make him react? He realizes the book is giving him his future. And it's a book written by River, sent back to Amy to publish with her afterword.

Thank for that. I did see the epsiode.

My point is. River's dialogue before the Doctor tells her to change the future. 'So who's wrist will you break? its or mine.' Then the Doctor makes a big fuss that he has to break River's 'because the book said' and is all peeved at Amy because she 'read it and fixed it'. Again the implication is that if she hadn't he could have broken the Angel's wrist instead.

So yes, to me the episode implies that the Doctor could break the Angel's wrist he just doesn't because of the book being read.

Because if he can't; the book reading thing doesn't affect anything because he'd never be able to break River out without breaking her wrist, anyway.

[PREDATOR490]

Amy did NOT say the Doctor had to break River's wrist.

Amy directly quoted from the book with the following:

Amy: On page 43 your going to break something
Doctor: I'm what ?
Amy: Why do you have to break mine, I asked the Doctor. He frowned and said because Amy read it in a book and now I have no choice
Doctor: I'm going to break something because you told me I am going to break something

Somehow that translated into: I must break River's wrist... how ?
I seriously do not think the Doctor is capable of breaking the wrist of an Angel... if he can... well... thanks for keeping that ability to yourself when Mr Priest dude got headlocked.

[Captain Seafort]

Somehow that translated into: I must break River's wrist... how ?

Amy: Why do you have to break mine, I asked the Doctor.

That's why. A wrist needs to be broken to release River, he knows River is the narrator, and the narrator references the Doctor breaking something of hers, implicitly contrasted with the same or a similar thing belonging to someone or something else. Ergo, it's River's wrist that needs to be broken.

[generator_g1]

Rory’s dad, Brian Williams, only appeared in two episodes but swiftly established himself as a favourite amongst Doctor Who’s audience. After Amy and Rory’s heart-breaking departure in The Angels Take Manhattan we received many emails asking what happened next to Brian. Did he ever find out what took his son and daughter-in-law? If so, how? And would Brian – and viewers - ever learn more about Amy and Rory’s life after the Doctor?

A special scene was written by Chris Chibnall that revealed some of the answers but sadly, the sequence was never shot. However, we’re happy to announce that we’ll be bringing you the scene tomorrow. Using animated storyboards and a voice-over specially recorded by Arthur Darvill, we’ll discover more about Brian and the Ponds, post-Angels.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/doctorwho/ar ... -the-Ponds

It begins with Brian alone, doing what he once told the Doctor must be done – watering the plants. But his life is about to change forever…

Doctor Who’s Executive Producer, Caro Skinner, said, ‘We’re delighted we can present this lovely scene written by Chris Chibnall. People took Rory’s dad, Brian, to their hearts very quickly, so it’s fitting we can give the character a degree of closure in this poignant piece.’

P.S. is a short video written by Chris Chibnall and will be essential viewing for anyone who wants to know more about what happened to Brian, Amy and Rory. It will be available to watch on this site tomorrow, Friday, 12th October.

[Captain Seafort]

They really should have filmed that, even if it meant cutting stuff out of the rest of the episode (Amy's blubbing at the end springs to mind), or elongating it like they did some of the others.

[Satori]

I think the show has been on a slow descent from somewhat silly but still great sci-fi storytelling it was in RTD's first season to glorified kids show.

You do realize that Doctor Who started out as a kids show?

-------

I'm looking forward to the point where the Doctor realizes that there needs to be something to take the place of the time lords.

When the time lords were in play, the worst you had were the eternals skulking about.

Without them, the Reapers come out to play, and the Carrionites try to get loose, and the Weeping angels go from being so 'long gone' that they legend even on Gallifrey, to popping up in manhattan.

I mean, for crying out loud, the weird aliens who try to take "the tally", the Shakri? Even the time lords regarded them as myth. It was said that Rasillon banished magic from the universe back in his day. With the time lords gone, everything they sealed away or held back is startin to creep back in...

[TimothyC]

That was a nice way to end Rory's character arc, and I wish it would have been included in the show.

[mr friendly guy]

I think the show has been on a slow descent from somewhat silly but still great sci-fi storytelling it was in RTD's first season to glorified kids show.

You do realize that Doctor Who started out as a kids show?
.

I am sure most people here do. It started out as an educational show by doing historical stories. They however jumped the shark the next episode when the Daleks first appeared. They did continue to do "pure" historical stories, IIRC the last one was the Highlanders in Patrick Troughton's era. In the 1960s, before focussing more on a sci fi bent. As such I think its pointless to appeal to tradition that it started as a kids show, when its clearly moved beyond that, as a defense to people who find the show's quality has deteriorated.

[Captain Seafort]

I am sure most people here do. It started out as an educational show by doing historical stories. They however jumped the shark the next episode when the Daleks first appeared.

It was never intended to be solely an educational show - the intention was to roughly alternate between historical and sci-fi.

IIRC the last one was the Highlanders in Patrick Troughton's era. In the 1960s, before focussing more on a sci fi bent. As such I think its pointless to appeal to tradition that it started as a kids show, when its clearly moved beyond that, as a defense to people who find the show's quality has deteriorated.

It's never "moved beyond" being a kids show - that's what it started as, that's what it remained until 1989, and that's what it resumed as. The fact that it's not the Teletubbies doesn't change that.