In the Forest of the Night

Home Forums Episodes The Twelfth Doctor In the Forest of the Night

This topic contains 249 replies, has 58 voices, and was last updated by  Dentarthurdent 9 months, 1 week ago.

Viewing 50 posts - 151 through 200 (of 250 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #34323
    Anonymous @

    @beancounter

    I really don’t think that statement is a valid counterpoint.

    Perhaps, perhaps not but the other comments @pedant made are perfectly valid.

    And then there is the subtle man-bashing. Remember the first episode of the season? “All men are apes”

    Yet you say Danny seems wise and patient – I wouldn’t class that as man-bashing. Are you suggesting that to be a believable male character, Danny should be stupid and aggressive?

    Another thing that bothers me is the show seems to primarily focus and the relationship of Clara and Danny with the plot and the Doctor taking a back seat.

    Out of 10 episodes, we’ve had what 3 or 4 references to their relationship? Hardly the primary focus.

    The Doctor’s character has been marginalized into a grumpy doofus.

    The Doctor, through all of his incarnations, has been prone to grumpiness – some (eg. 1st Doctor) more than others (eg. 11th Doctor).

    @everyone – is it just me who’s noticed that a lot of our recent ‘trollish’ members all claim to have started watching Doctor Who with Tom Baker and then immediately launch into an attack on Clara and Danny? Hmm, these trolls couldn’t all be the same person could they?

     

     

    #34324

    @fatmaninabox

     is it just me who’s noticed that a lot of our recent ‘trollish’ members all claim to have started watching Doctor Who with Tom Baker and then immediately launch into an attack on Clara and Danny

    Nope.

    Hmm, these trolls couldn’t all be the same person could they?

    Yep.

    #34326
    beancounter @beancounter

    To me that statement is rather direct and obvious man bashing. Apes are generally considered less intelligent than humans and brutish. Therefore comparing men to apes is an intentional insult pretending to be a good natured jab. Clearly you disagree, so please explain why.

    It was just an unintentional typo, hardly a crime.

    Now, I realize that most people here are hardcore fans, and saying anything negative about the show is considered an act of war, but I am not going to apologetically disagree, walk on eggshells or sugar coat my opinion.

    #34327

    so please explain why.

    Yeah, right. ‘Cos people are gonna take bait like that.

    Now, back to troll school for you.

    #34328
    BESD1 @besd1

    @phileasf        “it’s pretty amazingly irresponsible to have the Doctor say, in effect, that people who hear voices should stop taking their prescribed medication. Wow. Not sure how that one got through.”

     

    The fact that it did get through tells me that it wasn’t in anyway accidental. Far from a glib comment offering general encouragement to stop taking the meds, I think this is the writer (presumably with the support of the show runner) making a very pointed comment specifically about the medication of children as a response to behavioural concerns. As someone who has spent a lifetime working with children with behavioural difficulties this line really struck a chord with me. Overwhelmingly the young people I’ve worked with who have been medicated (a) have been under a prescription from a very young age (b) express feelings about their medication ranging from resignation and guilt to anger and fear, often with associated, unpleasant physical symptoms (c) express a desire to not be medicated (d) have developed strategies around their medication that enable them to regain control – the most common, conversely, being that they will not take meds so as to lose control.

    The overall effect is that these young people stop seeing themselves as agents in their own lives. Medication should (and can) be used as a short term measure to enable an individual to develop behaviour management strategies that support their development in social and educational terms. The responses listed above tell us that the opposite is the case. The child believes that the meds control their behaviour and that they have no role to play in this process, largely because so little is explained to them and their families at the time of diagnosis (anyone who has ever read a statement of SEN will know that they make nothing obvious or clear to a child, nor to any parents who have limited education or literacy skills). Moreover, the process of reviewing prescriptions is often a box ticking exercise, taking place at statutorily specified intervals, rather than being part of an ongoing dialogue. The conclusion this leads us to is that not only are we not listening to children, we are also not talking to them, and even worse, we’re not letting them speak to themselves.

     

    In short, I take that line as an entreaty to us as a society to do more of all three.

    #34330
    Anonymous @

    @beancounter

    Apes are generally considered less intelligent than humans and brutish.

    Actually most apes are generally considered to be intelligent and gentle-natured. Try watching some Wildlife Documentaries that were made after the 1960’s. May I recommend ones by David Attenborough?

    #34331
    Miapatrick @miapatrick

    @beancounter, in fact, it seems you don’t. The line is: people are apes. Men are monkeys, spoken by a woman who’s own wife refers to as a lizard. People being apes, as @badwulf points out, is accurate. Men being monkeys is affectionate.

    #34333
    BadWulf @badwulf

    @beancounter It was just an unintentional typo, hardly a crime.

    Indeed – I was simply drawing your attention to it, because it was making it tricky to actually respond to you, as the autolinks were not working.

    #34334
    BadWulf @badwulf

    @beancounter To me that statement is rather direct and obvious man bashing. Apes are generally considered less intelligent than humans and brutish. Therefore comparing men to apes is an intentional insult pretending to be a good natured jab. Clearly you disagree, so please explain why.

    All men *are* apes, it is an indisputable fact.

    Given that humans are a subset of the hominids, and hominids are a subset of the apes.

    I don’t take offence at being called a mammal, a vertebrate, or even an animal, because the terms are entirely accurate and I have better things to do with my time.

    #34336
    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    @phileasf and @besd1

    The fact that it did get through tells me that it wasn’t in anyway accidental.

    It wasn’t accidental. I had a bit of a comment on that on another forum:

    Medication versus listening. Everyone wants to give Maebh her medication rather than deal with those embarrassing habits and listen to the strange voices. Except for the Doctor, who has obviously added ‘child psychiatry’ to his ‘Doctor of everything’ qualifications. He can listen; he can see – and he can tell the difference between a ‘nervous tic’ and gestures that mean something. So he asks Maebh where the forest came from.

    Once she tells him where she thinks the forest came from, he’s very practical throughout. He listens, he reassures her that she couldn’t have made the forest by herself, and later on he gives her the opportunity to do something herself.

    It’s a bit like Bradley being told by Clara to say ‘please’, and later managing to say please. That method means he controls his own behaviour – rather than thinking it’s the meds doing it.

    #34337
    beancounter @beancounter

    Well, I don’t have time to respond to everyone, but I think you all understand that primates are generally considered “lower life forms”, relative to humans, and that’s where the bashing comes in. But you can view things from a certain perspective to fit your own internal narrative…so we are not going to agree.

    Also, that was not the only point I made in the thread. However, that is the only one everyone commented on, so can I assume you all agree on my other points? Or were you just cherry picking the only point you could “win” on?

    #34338
    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    @beancounter

    she really seems to have no regard for the Doctor beyond getting a free ride through time.

    Yeah, all that getting herself split into hundreds of Claricles and telling him to save himself while she stays with the kids is so selfish.

    saying anything negative about the show is considered an act of war,

    Indeed it is. We have the Three Billy Goats Gruff on standby, Gandalf the Grey is just behind the rock and a crack team of church bell-ringers have phoned to say that they’re on their way. 🙂

    #34339
    DrBen @drben

    @bluesqueakpip @phileasf @besd1 – This is not an unusual trope in fantasy.  Everyone assumes that the person who sees things/hears voices/acts weird is actually insane/ill/whatever, when in reality she (usually she) is just more sensitive/talking to ghosts/in touch with aliens/whatever.  It’s a version of the “You Have to Believe Me” trope.

    The Doctor said what he said, but really, no one is suggesting that every proto-schizophrenic in the world is actually talking to tree-fairy creatures.  The use of this trope on Maebh doesn’t suggest that mental illness isn’t a real thing, or that actual mentally ill people should stop taking their medication altogether.

    Now, there is a real-world debate about whether, by medicating some forms of mental illness, we are killing off a generation of creative geniuses (see, e.g., Kay Redfield Jamison’s excellent Touched By Fire), but that’s not really what we’re talking about.

    #34340
    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    @drben

    No, it’s not. We’re talking about giving a twelve year old medication because she hears voices. Maebh isn’t an adult hearing voices – she’s twelve. Kids hear voices, have imaginary friends, do all sorts of things that would signal mental illness in an adult.

    Genuine schizophrenia would be an unbelievably rare mental illness for a twelve year old.

    In addition, there’s a very clear stressor in her little life. Her sister’s gone missing. And the reaction to this obvious cause of the problem? Give her medication… which is really going to help her deal with the next big stress-event that comes along.

    The way the script is written, it’s very obvious that what Maebh needs is for someone to sit down and listen to what she’s saying. And then explain to her that it’s not her fault, as many times as needed. And then give her something practical to do about her missing sister. Instead, she gets told to shut up and take the tablets.

    And if we really are doing that to all our unhappy children, instead of talking to them about why they’re unhappy – maybe we need to stop? And listen.

    #34341
    Anonymous @

    @beancounter

    Or were you just cherry picking the only point you could “win” on?

    You see this is the thing, no-one on this forum is here to ‘win’. We’re here to have discussions. And it wasn’t the only point that you were called out on. We’ve pointed out that Clara is indeed flawed and that Danny does have skeletons in his closet despite your assertions to the contrary.

    Is there anything else you’d care to discuss?

    @bluesqueakpip

    We also have the return of our dear old friend. She would’ve been here sooner but she’s been having a bit of trouble with a pesky time-travelling woman who keeps leaving toy soldiers in her barn 😉

    #34343

    @beancounter who can’t.

    primates are generally considered “lower life forms”

    You do realise that all humans – ALL humans – are primates, right? Including you (assuming your are human and not a NotVeryCleverbot).

     

    PS

    Apropos of nothing, Cleverbot once accused me of being the antichrist.

    #34344
    beancounter @beancounter

    And is it me, or are they mentioning that Doctor Who is 2,000 years old a lot this season.

    Why not 1,000 or 3,000 years old? (or some other number)

    You don’t need to be a theologian to understand what’s being implied.

    #34345
    beancounter @beancounter

    You do realise that all humans – ALL humans – are primates, right? Including you (assuming your are human and not a NotVeryCleverbot

    Now you’re just playing a game of semantics. You know what I meant.

    Yea, I’m human.

    #34348
    Anonymous @

    @beancounter Jesus- wake- me- up- already  – We disagree and debate on this site all on the time. Some of us have done so recently. Some of us don’t like particular episodes, whole arcs and yet we come here to discuss it not drool over all of it lovingly. Well, I do, but that’s me. 🙂

    #34349
    DrBen @drben

    @bluesqueakpip – Indeed.  I just meant that the “let’s give the person hearing voices medication instead of listening to what they have to say” is a common storytelling device.  There were those upthread who suggested or implied (unless maybe I’m misreading) that it was dangerous or irresponsible of the Doctor to suggest that everyone who hears voices should stop taking their medication.

    I fully agree that, when faced with a 12-year-old girl whose sister has just disappeared and is acting strangely, medication should not be the first solution.

    My over-arching point is that Doctor Who is not a show about real-world child psychology any more than it is a show about real-world lunar science. 😉

    #34350
    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    @beancounter

    You don’t need to be a theologian to understand what’s being implied

    It implies a) that the Doctor is as old as God and b) that he’s been Born Again.

    Try again. We’ve had Hot Button 1: ‘I don’t like any of the characters’ with Hot Button 2: ‘the show is sexist’, now we’re onto Hot Button 3: ‘religion’.

    I think ‘gay agenda’ should be the next up on the list. Or maybe you could try politics? Would you like to try politics? 🙂

    #34351
    BadWulf @badwulf

    @beancounter Well, I don’t have time to respond to everyone, but I think you all understand that primates are generally considered “lower life forms”, relative to humans, and that’s where the bashing comes in. But you can view things from a certain perspective to fit your own internal narrative…so we are not going to agree.

    Also, that was not the only point I made in the thread. However, that is the only one everyone commented on, so can I assume you all agree on my other points? Or were you just cherry picking the only point you could “win” on?

    What do you mean “lower”? I’m trying to understand *your* internal narrative, as it would appear to be a little incoherent, and I would like to help to bring it some structure, and perhaps, dare I say it, rigour, by pointing out where some of the more glaring factual inexactitudes are.

    At the moment, there is nothing for us to reach agreement on, since I have not brought up discussion points, but simply identified where you were in error. This community is based on collaborative conversations about something for which we have a shared affection – there are no competitions or debates, and thus, to speak about points to “win” on would be entirely missing the point.

    And is it me, or are they mentioning that Doctor Who is 2,000 years old a lot this season.

    Why not 1,000 or 3,000 years old? (or some other number)

    You don’t need to be a theologian to understand what’s being implied.

    Certainly, we have promised lands, afterlives, Lazarus-sisters and a protagonist who has reached the end of his allotted lives, sacrificed himself for an entire world of innocents, and then been granted a whole new existence by a powerful force. These are tropes that permeate our culture, and it would be difficult to find a show that hasn’t played with them at some point.

    #34354
    geoffers @geoffers

    @stormintheheartofthesun – good spot. i had noticed the red police box, but it hadn’t triggered my bonkers radar. haven’t the real ones all been converted to book exchanges, now? if so, one that still looks like a phone box might be very conspicuous, indeed?

    #34356
    Juniperfish @juniperfish

    @bluesqueakpip

    It implies a) that the Doctor is as old as God and b) that he’s been Born Again.

    It does.

    What is interesting is that we speculated the Doctor might be free of his past with a new set of regenerations, but Moff has chosen to continue with the War Doctor’s burden still lying heavy over the Doctor’s hearts. I do wonder if the Valeyard is coming. And after that, a lifting of the burden with the return of the Time Lords to the universe, and therefore the beginning of another kind of burden – the Doctor as a maverick Time Lord often clashing with his people once more, rather than being the last of his kind. That’s what I’d do with this story.

    #34357
    PaperMoon @papermoon

    Evening all,

    @phaseshift – I also noticed the wolves and tiger in the museum and then, later, the predators in the forest happen to be wolves and a tiger. It seems a strange coincidence, but then it could be just a coincidence. But the closer I look at this episode the more I get a sense of someone making this up (or parts of it, at least) as they go along.

    I also noticed that when we see Maebh’s mother talking on the phone the first time we see her, she complains about the hydrangeas the neighbours have planted. Did Maebh’s sister reappear from out of a hydrangea bush? It a pretty brief scene so, I may have interpreted whatever the plant was as a hydrangea.

    @stormintheheartofthesun – thanks, I thought it was Orson. I find the Rupert-Orson link interesting. If it is indeed a family heirloom, and there’s no reason (at least for me) to assume Orson was lying, will Danny suddenly produce it at some point? As you say, there is the suggestion of a future for Danny and Clara. Is this why he’s prepared to put up with (to some extent) her lying? Does he remember the person who told him that this toy soldier would protect him when he was a child in the orphanage? If indeed Rupert was him as a child.

    I’m still confused as to why the Doctor turns up to Clara with Orson saying ‘Look who I found’ (or something like that) and then he later says Danny and Orson look nothing alike. We, as an audience, know that they do. They’re played by the same actor, there is a reason why this was done. Clearly, I don’t know what this reason is. The three Danny’s thing still bothers me, clearly, lol.

    @rob – I’ve also wondered if there is a Maebh-Clara link. Maebh knocks on the Doctor’s door saying ‘Are you the Doctor? I need the Doctor’. She was being chased by something, she tells the Doctor ‘Miss Oswald told me to find the Doctor, but it wasn’t. It was just in my head.’ Later, the Doctor points out to Clara that Maebh was missing (she’s surprised), she then points this out to Danny (he’s surprised). The Doctor shows Clara Maebh’s book about the solar flare and refers to the solar flare on Karabraxox . Clara wants to know where he got the book from, he says she left it in the TARDIS. Clara says something like ‘You don’t think Danny saw this, do you?’

    Despite Clara having problems with accepting the Doctor’s regeneration in the first episode, I get a feeling of them both reaching out to each other.

    #34358
    Spider @spider

    The Doctor is at least 2000 years old. Because he was ~1000 years old (ish – possibly younger, I think 904 was said in Voyage Of The Damned) when 10 regenerated into 11. And 11 spent at least 1000? years on trenzalore, plus there was at least 200 years of him time travelling about when Amy and Rory weren’t traveling with him. Plus probably lots more instances I’ve forgotten about.

    I’m pretty sure SM has said the Doctor has no idea how old he is so just makes it up. Remember rule #1: The Doctor lies. So I think the general idea is he is vaguely ‘in his 2000’s’.

    So @beancounter there’s really no point in trying to read something into what is essentially a made up number XD.

    Also regarding the ‘ape’ issue, as @miapatrick already pointed out the actual line is: “People are apes, men are monkeys.”. So it’s not just ‘man bashing’ it’s people bashing as well! Oh the humanity!!!

    And with everything else, well others have already commented so I shan’t repeat.

    I had intended to end this post with some bonkers theory but they have all deserted me for the moment!

    (\(\;;/)/)

    #34364
    janetteB @janetteb

    @papermoon I share your fascination with the Danny/Orson link. I have even had dreams about it where I work it all out then wake up and don’t remember just what the solution was. I suggested on The Sofa that Danny and Orson are twins and the Doctor is the time travelling ancestory Orson refers to. Danny has somehow gone back in time as a child, probably due to Susan, (whom I am determined to “write” back into the story) who assumably is his mother. (She may have regenerated at least once since we last encountered her.) I have tried to work the toy soldier into this. The Doctor would have passed it on to Susan who may have left it in the orphange with the infant Danny. I think something of my crazy dream has leaked through to the waking mind. Well bonkers theories are meant to be bonkers aren’t they??

    Cheers

    Janette

    #34371
    PaperMoon @papermoon

    @janetteb – I went and checked out the thread, thanks.

    #34389
    lisa @lisa

    Hello everyone ! my goodness you have all been so prolific with ideas since I’ve been away 🙂

    Trying to catch up on all the postings and I am so very exited to see the episode tomorrow !!
    So will we finally be getting a really good Missy-ing ?? Pleeassse !! lol Can hardly wait !

    just wanted to say 2 more little things
    — I think that sometimes people are taking medications not for themselves as much as for
    the relief of the people who are the caregivers which imo seems just so inappropriate and maybe
    the Doctor is thinking something like that too
    — at the very beginning of the episode the Doctor says something about when he turns on the
    terrestrial navigation it turns off other functions and I cant put my finger on why exactly
    but it seemed to me an odd thing to point out and its been bugging me – wondering if there is
    anyone else having any such thoughts in regards to that ? { I don’t recall seeing anything in the
    thread but I could have possibly missed something]
    [completely off topic I just wanted to share I got a Doctor Who phone cover delivered while
    away – very cool !]

    #34390
    Anonymous @

    @lisa good to see you back and good point regarding the terrestrial navigation system. @janetteb I love your theory about Orson & Danny as time travelling twins -I wonder if they share some other traits or share feelings -the tears in Dan’s eyes may connect to something Orson did at another time?

    @papermoon yes it was hydrangeas that Annabelle ‘stepped out of’ and yet why? Why was she ‘hiding’ there behind the hydrangeas and not some other tree? I thought the trees that grew over night were not bushes and shrubs and so ones planted by the neighbours would not then ‘disappear’ with the shiny silvery things. And yet those hydrangeas did! Confusing! I agree with your idea that things are being ‘made up’: the tiger and the other animals in museum then reanimating like a cartoon!

    @beancounter I love the avatar picture you’ve chosen. Long may it stay!

    #34392
    Anonymous @

    @drben I wanted to thank you (& others) for the ‘You have to Believe Me’ trope link and that page in general. I’ve spent ages reading the various links to Straw Hypocrite; Pious Do-gooder and hundreds of other tropes in TV/film. I particularly liked the quote by Lincoln Barwick to Malcom Tucker in ‘In the Loop’

    @rob I take your point. Negasphere. I shall count my hands and …calm down and drink a calming Camomile Tea instead of Coffee. Maybe?  No. Can’t give up the coffee at this point. I shall have tea AND coffee. One is without caffeine, though, which is a good thing?

    Kindest, puro

    #34394
    Miapatrick @miapatrick

    @lisa- re medication, I think you have a point. Though if anything what bugged me with this episode was the idea of a child that age, whose sister had disappeared would be given those kinds of meds. No clear evidence of a chemical problem.

    one thing- from my experience as a caregiver- is that sometimes people take medication for reasons that include the benifit of the caregiver, particularly when they don’t much care for themselves.

    The case in this episode, though, I think the doctor is right in his reaction. A pubescent child has just suffered a personal trauma. Listen, surely, first.

    Oh! Listen!

    #34414
    thommck @thommck

    Just quickly wanted to jump in to give my thoughts on this episode after reading all your posts.

    We’ve just spent a week in Thetford forest so this seemed like a very apt episode.

    It really didn’t gel with me at all, for a number of reasons. I don’t think it was an awful episode, my kids seemed to like it well enough, I just didn’t really understand what the motivation of everyone was.

    I understood straight away that the trees were protecting us so maybe that is why it all felt a bit lack lustre

    Instead of criticizing, think of this more as a list of questions…

    * Why was the doctor going to Trafalgar square in the first place
    * Why was Maebe so much like Amelia Pond?
    * Since when does the TARDIS have a voice sat nav
    * Anabelle reappearing in the hydrangeas suggests she had run away but others here think she was resurrected. The while thing was a bit too fairy tale (ok, maybe that’s the point)
    * Why were the sparkly things bothering Maebe and no-one else. Where they caused by the meds our the trauma?

    I liked how Danny was the hero again, using his torch a lot like a sonic screwdriver!

    I took the ending with Missy to mean she was trying to either test or kill the Doctor/Clara by causing the solar flare. She was surprised that the trees fought back.

    The sparky spirits are another tiny/invisible thing.

    Call back to Pompeii with the “Save who you can” bit. See the Missy blog for my thoughts on that!

    Can’t wait for tonight, I wonder how much will be revealed before the cliffhanger?

    Off to ask my boys on their Missy theories now

    #34416
    PaperMoon @papermoon

    @purofilion – it’s a fantasy happy ending and there’s the odd link between the mother complaining about the hydrangeas and then, ta-daa, Annabelle appears.

    @thommck – I agree there is some similarity between Maebh and Amelia (I’m assuming you mean the eight-year old). She also reminds me of a young Clara in terms of appearance.

    cheers

    #34422
    ScaryB @scaryb

    Very VERY late to watching and commenting on this. Only advantage to such extreme timeshifting is that it’s a VERY short time to wait till dark Water. Oh my heartses!!

    Lots of great comments (as ever!), too many to credit individually. While I didn’t hate this episode, it’s my least favourite of the run. Which even I find odd, as someone who loved Kill the Moon, trees in general and eco-themed Who. I liked a lot of it, but really wasn’t keen on the solution of using 1 small child’s voice to appeal to the world. I liked the concept of humans having to save themselves (by doing nothing (also like KtM)) but even my suspension of disbelief was feeling challenged!

    @mudlark and @Purofilion – thanks for the comments about deep, dark forests of fairytales (a regular haunt of mine also as a child).

    I’m assuming Maedb’s sister’s disappearance was connected with the sudden appearance of the neighbours’ hydrangea bush… kidnapped by the little sparkly things to create a link to the people of earth? (And why the name – Annabel Arden is a reasonably well known real life theatre director!)

    Danny! I still think he’s a good guy but his secret is connected to Missy/Clara’s future. In the context of Dr Who it’s very strange that he hasn’t travelled on the TARDIS, and in fact (as @bluesqueakpip pointed out) he can’t wait to get off it.

    #42142
    Anonymous @

    I was just going through re-watching every episode of Season 8 when I got to In Th Forest of the Night.  The first time I saw this episode I hated it. I thought that the writing was stupid, and the writer made the show seem like it was aimed at little kids. I don’t think that he really understood Doctor Who enough before trying to write an episode for it. Then of course there is the whole not scientific and made no sense aspect of it.

    I was hoping that maybe I could give the episode a second chance, so I started to re watch it with a very open mind.  I got 5 or 10 minutes into it, still hating it as much as the first time, when suddenly the TARDIS spoke to the Doctor. WHAT? Did anyone notice that!?!

    I just couldn’t even continue after that.  I remembered that episode was bad, but I guess the whole episode covered up the fact that it not only is scientifically impossible, but also goes against basic whovian knowledge. The TARDIS can’t talk!

    Just had to put that out there. I thought I was a little harsh on my judgement the first time, but the second time around I knew that my first opinion was more than accurate for judging the episode. I seriously wasn’t even able to finish it.  I skipped right to watching Dark Water.

    #42144
    OLD-NEW-BORROWED-BLUE @old-new-borrowed-blue

    I hated it too and I’ve only hated 4 episodes of new who

    1. In the forest of the night

    2. Love and monsters

    3. Closing time

    4. Curse of the black spot

    #42146
    Anonymous @

    Welcome @theconsultingdoctor,

    I remembered that episode was bad,

    ItFotN is my least favorite episode from S8 too, but with so many great stories the competition was set really high.

     

    but also goes against basic whovian knowledge. The TARDIS can’t talk!

    It’s basic whovian knowledge the TARDIS can talk now. It was established in Let’s Kill Hitler, the TARDIS has a voice interface that talks to the Doctor.

    but I guess the whole episode covered up the fact that it not only is scientifically impossible,

    Complaints about the bad science explained by the Doctor are mostly valid, but they should not count against the story because the Doctor admits he was just making the science up.

    [Space]

    (Clara and the Doctor are looking out of the Tardis doorway.)
    DOCTOR: I hope I’m right. It would be slightly awkward if the world was destroyed at this point.
    CLARA: What?

    That quote shows that the Doctor wasn’t even certain if the trees would save the Earth. He got lucky and turned out to be right that the trees would. But that doesn’t mean he was also right about how they did it.

    It is still open for there to be a better scientific theory to explain how the trees saved the planet than the Doctor’s theory.

    Maybe this helps you like it a little more, but not every episode is a classic, so it’s fair not to like every story.

    #42147
    Anonymous @

    @old-new-borrowed-blue I didn’t think Curse of the Black Spot was that bad. I had to go back and check on Closing Time, but I guess I agree with you.  There were a few others more in seasons 1, 2 and 7 that I didn’t really like. This one just really stood out and bothered me.  I usually don’t like episodes with kids in them except for Amy when she’s 7.

    #42148
    Anonymous @

    @fowl Oh, I forgot about the interface thing, but it didn’t seem like that.  The TARDIS has used an interface since Season 1, but this was just weird and robotic. It wasn’t like the normal interface.  Maybe I am still judging it to harshly and just trying to find a reason it turn it off.

    #42149
    Anonymous @

    @fowl Also, I am so crazy about the show. I don’t want you to get the idea that I’m judging the whole show because of that one episode. It is still my favorite along with Sherlock.

    #42151
    Anonymous @

    @fowl you have the patience of Job. When I read people say “this episode was just stupid, the writing was stupid” I really want to say something.

    So, I’m saying something.

    I want to say if people can’t say something nice, say nothing at all.

    BTW, I had no idea you were @fowl now. How’d that happen dude?

    #42160
    Anonymous @

    @purofilion Hi. I just want to say that I am sorry for my previous comment on the episode. I will not to say anything like that again, and I will think before I write.  I was frustrated and felt that I had to let it out, but I realize now that what I said was rude and offensive.  I promise that I will only use this forum to discuss theories and write opinions of episodes like everyone else. I also will try to be more positive.

    #42163
    Craig @craig
    Emperor

    @theconsultingdoctor I don’t think you have to apologise if that’s how you feel, you gave it another chance and a reasonable reason why you couldn’t continue. And @purofilion, we do welcome dissent here too. If someone doesn’t like something I’d like to hear why.

    “if people can’t say something nice, say nothing at all” is not a rule I would like applied to this forum – unless it is about fellow members – in which case, that is almost always the rule.

    #42164
    Anonymous @

    @TheConsultingDoctor

    No, I totally understand. I get that. It’s actually my least favourite episode of the Season but it was a very stunning application of what Armando Iannucci was saying in the Mactaggart Lecture: experiments can go awry, but we’ll never know unless we try and push those boundaries.

    Believe me, you can be negative about an episode: otherwise what is this wonderful Forum for? it’s not to just implicate brilliant scenes and the most outstanding of episodes and if I have given the impression that this is a totalitarian place with tons of rules -then I must say sorry, too. For it’s a huge and wonderful destination, this Forum, with people who genuinely write why they hated a certain episode. And that’s OK providing we can give positive reasons for why it sat badly with us, individually.

    For instance, I didn’t like some of Eccleston’s episodes: I felt he was not so great landing the comedy aspects. It’s perfectly fine to write that and to suggest a different actor, a different tone, different supporting actors (like those children you mentioned -because I too wondered if all those kids in the Tardis was really a good idea) and even a different story line. Please don’t think you’re not welcome to write those things; I guess, I’ve seen some people who’ve stated “oh, that’s so dumb” but haven’t really said, cogently, why they believe this to be the case.

    You’ve given some great ideas and theories since you arrived and I hope you continue to enjoy sharing as much as you can. I, for one, welcome you and appreciate your genuine opinions.

    Looking forward to hearing more!

    Kindest always,

    puro

    #42166
    Anonymous @

    @craig

    you’re quite right and I feel like I said the wrong thing completely -because I did. I guess what I meant to say, and did so very poorly, is that if we don’t like something we should say why”. I skipped that part out. I tend to write negative opinions about particular episodes but I enjoy explaining why. No-one should think this Forum is a place for only positive statements.

    My apologies for stepping way out of line (that’s twice in a week!).

    Kindest,

    puro

     

     

    #42167
    Anonymous @

    @craig @purofilion Thank you both for understanding. I hope to stay on this forum for a while with many more theories to introduce. I would never say anything that might offend someone on the forum.

    #42171
    Anonymous @

    @TheconsultingDoctor  not at all. You haven’t offended anyone. I need to re-read before I post. I make this mistake quite a bit lately.

    @craig

    “if people can’t say something nice, say nothing at all” is not a rule I would like applied to this forum – unless it is about fellow members – in which case, that is almost always the rule”

    Indeed it is. We get clocked on the head when we say something out of line. Are we told “gee that was a nice thing to say” when we are positive, helpful, obliging and welcoming?

    Nope. We get the Daleks more than snow flakes.

     

     

     

    #42181
    Craig @craig
    Emperor

    @purofilion I’m sorry if I offended you. I was a bit cranky last night – was supposed to be going out last night and ended up being stuck indoors instead.

    Can I, a little bit late, say many thanks for all your welcomes to new members etc. The reason I can’t thank you for all the positive things you write/do is that it would take up my every waking hour 🙂

    I hope no harm done.

    #42187
    Mudlark @mudlark

    @TheConsultingDoctor    This is a somewhat belated response to your post #42142, but the views you expressed interested me.  I did not dislike the episode to the extent that you evidently did, but although I found things in it enjoy and appreciate, it did leave me dissatisfied. Not, however, for the reasons you expressed.  The counterfactual ‘science’ did not bother me particularly, because the story was clearly couched in terms of a fairy story, with specific references to some well known tales – and I am not talking here about the bowdlerised and sanitised (not to say Disneyfied) versions of fairy stories generally considered suitable for children, but the kind which I grew up with: a straight translation of the stories collected by the brothers Grimm which I, little ghoul that I was aged 6-10, relished.  The problem for me was that In the Forest of the Night, as fairy tale, did not evoke that same dark magic.

    To my mind, it is a mistake to think of Doctor Who as straight science fiction, because for the most part it never has been, at least in the strict sense.  This question was discussed at some length in the Kill the Moon thread, and there were several who agreed with me that it was at most ‘soft’ science fiction or science fantasy, when it did not cross the boundary in to pure fantasy.  I don’t think that there are many who have a problem with this, as long as the ‘science’ is presented in terms of handwavium and impressive sounding gobbledegook.  Where it gets difficult is when, as in Kill the Moon and, to a lesser degree in this episode, the story depends on something which contradicts established scientific fact or theory.  At that point one has to just give up, or accept that the Whoniverse is not our universe and go with the flow.

    As for ‘basic Whovian knowledge’ and the Tardis talking; how much consistency has there ever been across the 50 year + history of Doctor Who?  If we get bogged down in the minutiae, that way lies madness  🙂

Viewing 50 posts - 151 through 200 (of 250 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.