On The Sofa (6)

[ichabod @ichabod]

@lisa  The Doctor tries to do good, although sometimes he falls off the wagon into a vengefulness that can be pretty harsh for a show with a “family” viewership (Family of Blood, etc.).  I came across a very odd discussion on reddit about how the scripts hide clues that the Doctor was — the Devil, or at least demonically evil, in the past, but has reformed by taking the name “The Doctor” as a sign of his promise to heal instead of hurting.  Anybody else see this?

http://www.reddit.com/r/doctorwho/comments/1eq0lm/thematic_allusions_between_the_doctor_and_the/

[lisa @lisa]

@ichabod Thanks for the link ! So I don’t think the Doctor was the devil before
‘choosing’ to become the Doctor. But I do think the guy carries around a lot of
baggage and a lot of it isn’t happy stuff which therefore causes him all sorts
of distress. The parallels in the writing between Doctor and devil are a device
SM is using to show glimpses of how he feels about needing redemption from (as
he puts it himself to Clara ) ‘past mistakes’. I still think that SM is writing
a superhero and many super heroes have dark sides. Look at Loki or Batman etc.
These are the psychopathic super heroes and the Doctor has a lot of issues
that make him a little crazy too.
The Hurt Doctor was the closet thing to being like a devil in that he became
a warrior in a hell situation and sought to destroy Galifrey.
As it happens It all seems to me to be fitting nicely with all the myths and legends
themes which SM apparently likes so much

[lisa @lisa]

@ichabod Btw in spite of the occasional darkness it still remains that he
is for me a super hero that chooses to follow the path of light. The
previously went by a different name has been established but I don’t think
the intent has ever been to brand him as being the devil,
Lucifer as the angel who was the bringer of light and had a fall from grace
has some parallels in the Doctors story too. I think that might be a better
analogy without going to the totally evil devil hell pit place. Although
I’m no expert on the whole convoluted mash up of all of it to me they
have always been 2 different things/characters.

[ichabod @ichabod]

Naw, it’s pretty far-fetched, this “he’s the Devil” thing, but somebody had some fun making the case!  It’s amazing what gets projected onto what started as a goofy little show about a crazy alien gramps in a junkyard 50 yrs ago — though now it’s a big show, polished and, below obvious surface levels, quite sophisticated,  although still a bit goofy now and then (the dinosaur in “Deep Breath” really was way too huge, and would have become a big problem when it got hungry . . . ).

I don’t know about the super-hero thing, though.  In the DW comics, he’s drawn like a super-hero, all exaggerated action and excited dialog.  But on TV at least, the Doctor’s only “super-powers”, so far as I can see, are biological enhancements — a very sharp mind stocked with experience over a very long life; an extra heart; and the ability to die into instant reincarnation as an adult because his cells reshape him in an instant in a massive discharge of energy.  The rest is detachable add-ons: sonic screwdriver, Tardis, and huge memory (the memory sometimes semi-detaches itself by becoming limited by “gray areas” of non-memory when a story demands this).  Oh, and there’s some degree of telepathy, isn’t there?  But it seems to be very patchy and unreliable (in fact I can’t remember any incidents of its being a crucial aspect of a DW story).

How does that compare to, say, being able to fly, repel bullets with your skin, climb buildings with spider silk, run incredibly fast or turn things to ice or fire with a touch or a thought, like other superheroes that come to mind?  Though maybe Batman . . . who has no “magic” that I know of, does use nifty tools like the Batmobile, and in recent years has become very “dark”, in some ways an anti-hero, the way the Doctor can be on a really bad day . . . The major similarity, I think, is that the Doctor takes on dangerous situations much as super-heroes do, but the main difference is that he hardly ever uses physical force to solve those problems.  Super-heroes swing their fists and throw bad guys around, which the Doctor almost never does.

Maybe that’s because he’s a super-hero from Gallifrey, not a transformed Earth person?  A whole different approach; different enough to make him something other, or more, or less than a super-hero?

 

[TLSass @tlsass]

I believe The Doctor is a superhero. His ability to regenerate is similar to say Wolverine, or countless other heroes. The massive knowledge he carries of time itself feels like a  superhero ability to me. The character feels like to me the Anti-hero since all that really means is that he doesn’t fit a traditional mold. Sorry for jumping in, I just wanted to join in on this interesting conversation.

[ichabod @ichabod]

@  godsakes, no need to apologize — you’re supposed to jump in!  I’d agree that in Earth terms, he could be seen as a super-hero for having those abilities, but the avoidance of violence marks him as a wholly different kind of hero, to me; also because his deeds he’s maybe more a hero for what he does and what he’s done (the whole Trenzalore story, driving away the Big Eye thing with mere threats without a punch thrown, etc.) than for what he *is*, and that’s a smart, brave, even reckless adventurer desperately on the run from boredom, banality, and (at various points) his own guilt.  Aren’t superheroes more like amped up crime fighters?  The Doctor does that too, sometimes; but I see him more as a problem solver, and that just doesn’t read as “superhero” to me.

Anti-heroes, though — aren’t they characters with dark sides, even criminal aspects, who when push comes to shove will somehow break out of their cynical shells and save the day, usually with crude violence?  I can’t think of an example, though.   I do think, though, that it’s more extreme than just being non-traditional.  Oh, how about Constantine, the demon-killer character from comics and a recent tv series?  On the surface he’s mean and cynical and doesn’t give a damn, but at crunch time sure enough, he comes through.  Well then, maybe CapDoc does qualify — at least, a lot of viewers were dismayed by what they saw as his “mean” nature in Series 8.  ??

[Anonymous @]

@ichabod continuing from the TV thread where we’re veering wildly off topic!

You are a fortunate friend to have -and very kind to be able to assist your friend with her business. Working in a private business is one place where we can extend our private energies without the corporate ladder yelling at us from above or those (from perceptions of fear as you mentioned) below struggling to climb above us  & stamping on our hands in the process!

Yes, if the mystical energy is a flux ‘thing’ which is created purely from some DNA codex and which transmits us or transmutes us into physical energy until we’re reached a point where it is no longer necessary for us to move ‘upwards’ and we are automatically manifest spirits.

Bear in mind these are thoughts of mine -once I wasn’t struggling with them, I simply believed them and whilst critical or naturally intrigued by theological questions, I was still an ‘active’ church member. Not so much now and certainly not because I’ve thrown up my hands and become ‘too good’ for any kind of belief: I do find some non-believers a little ‘sneery’ in their affectations of what is trendy about spiritualism.

I met a man a while ago who claimed to be a deeply spiritual person who liked to do his isometric exercises at the beach each day whilst at night toured the bars looking for one night stands while his wife and 4 children were at home. He lied quite happily. Spiritual my ass!

@tlsass welcome! Are you new to this site? Yes, I’d say the Doctor has super-hero capacities; but as @ichabod has said, these people usually have some sort of need for violence and super bodily strength. I don’t see that with the Doctor -regeneration could be seen as a super power, though. In Kill the Moon, for the first time, the Doctor says that if Lundvik shoots him, he might “just regenerate on and on, forever.” A rare thing for the Doctor to say to someone he’s never met. A means of repelling the potential bad guys.

If anything his super power is making powerful enemies turn and run simply because of his speeches!  He gives away, not so much his regenerative power, but his memories (or parts of his soul) when the large ‘god’  Akehaton feeds on his stories.

Perhaps his superpower is the ability to wield great stories from which we all can learn: to bring many races from different planets and universes together and help them find a home. Is being kind and compassionate a superpower? Possibly. Maybe it’s time to reconstruct new definitions of what makes a superhero. Certainly Clara identified fear as a superpower after the Doctor first did to Rupert in Listen (one of my favourite episodes)

[ichabod @ichabod]

@purofilion Well, that’s me paying it forward, for help given to me in the past.  I’ve been lucky, and am lucky enough still to be able to be in a position to do that.

Beware anyone, *anyone*, who claims to “be spiritual”.  Those usually turn out to be egomaniacs with a taste for gathering a personal cult of — admirers?  Followers?  Worshipers?  I have to keep coming back to Zen ideas here — those who speak don’t know; those who know don’t speak — presumably because they don’t have to.  Their presence and their actions spell out their authenticity to others who are capable of getting the message.  Words, poor things, beautiful and pleasing as they are, really are cheap.  All they cost is a breath or a few taps on the keyboard, at least as long as you live in what passes for a free country these days.

All those frauds and phonies of the sixties and onward — hot air.  Literally, here in the Southwest; ambitious white men and women hijacked their own versions of Native American spirituality, claimed to be part Indian, and sold chants and dances and sweat-lodge sessions to other whites as routes to “spiritual cleansing and power”.

Regenerating forever — that would be something to see — snap, snap, snap — he’d die of sheer exhaustion, I think, or simply combust.  it was an empty, imaginative threat, playful, even.  He’s a bit manic in KtM, isn’t he?  I think his real super-power is his mastery of the art of improvisation.  “Do something clever — !”  He does, all the time, and expects his companions to be able to keep up.   It’s the power to clear your feelings so your brain can see into the crux of the matter and find an immediate response that *might* work, and then the sheer nerve to go ahead with it, risk and all.  His enemies don’t have to see weapons or brawn or all that testosterone rage of the Hulk and his ilk to be scared off: they just have to recognize that this is that guy who finds finds a way and brings it, whatever the risk, on sheer energy and (you should pardon the expression) brass balls.

Super hero, I don’t know; hero?  Often.  Naturally, he doesn’t claim to be one.

Whoo.  Bed now; it’s 2:30 a.m. here!

sleepy ichi

[hamhock @hamhock]

Doctor who is a messed up show the doctor wants to ensure the destruction of his own race the daraleks destroy his race the humans become the daraleks he protects the humans to ensure they become the daraleks

[@@@@ @members]

Hi all,

I have a question that has been bugging me since I watched an old episode with minyons from minyos in it.

my question is, has anyone noticed that the minions from despicable me look a lot like the minyons?

Regards Ed.

[ichabod @ichabod]

@lisa  — just came across some interview remarks with Steven Moffatt.  According to him, the Doctor is not a hero; he’s “a man who sometimes acts as a hero”, so that seems to be his definition.

On the other hand, in the same interview SM says that part of the Doctor’s non-hero identity is that he doesn’t go *looking for trouble*, which is, apparently, what he thinks heroes (and super-heroes, by extension) do.  So for him, the Doctor is just sort of touring around the universe sightseeing (?) and lo, trouble somehow always finds him?  A likely story!  Though you could assume, I guess, that we don’t get to *see* the travels that don’t turn into “a thing” because, where’s the entertaining adventure?

So, seems to me that thinking of the Doctor as a hero is as good as any other way of thinking about him, never mind what anybody says!

@@@@  Hi, Ed.  I don’t watch BG Who — there are only so many hours in the day these days — so I’m afraid I don’t have an answer, but somebody else here might.

 

 

[@@@@ @members]

Sorry, what is BG who?

[Craig @craig Emperor]

Hi Ed, we use BG Who on here to refer to the Doctor Who stories Before the Gap (BG). What some people call New Who, or the modern series, we call AG Who, for After the Gap. It makes the new series feel more of a continuation, than a reboot.

I’m afraid your chosen username, because of the quirks of this website, makes it impossible for people to tag you in discussions. You may want to delete that account and start again with a username that doesn’t include the @ symbol.

[Craig @craig Emperor]

Dear all,

As we have reached the finale of The Dæmons it’s time to consider what we might like to watch from Tom Baker’s time in the TARDIS. In no particular order, here are a few classics that spring to mind.

The Ark in Space
4 Episodes. By Robert Holmes. Hugely influential on sci-fi. There may have been no ‘Alien’ if not for this story.

Pyramids of Mars
4 Episodes. By Robert Holmes and Lewis Greifer. A classic of the Gothic horror era in which an Egyptian God manifests itself in a Victorian manor house.

Horror of Fang Rock
4 Episodes. By Terrance Dicks and inspired by a real-life mystery. The Doctor battles an alien shapeshifter in a lonely lighthouse.

The Brain of Morbius
4 episodes. By both Who legends Terrance Dicks and Robert Holmes. Features the Sisterhood of Karn, who latterly created the War Doctor.

The Deadly Assassin
4 Episodes. By Robert Holmes. Set on Gallifrey. Lets us see what a bunch of petty idiots the Time Lords really are.

Logopolis
4 Episodes. By Christopher Bidmead. Tom’s last story, in which he actually teams up with Anthony Ainley’s Master.

And then there is, of course, Genesis of the Daleks.

I await your input!

[Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip]

@ichabod

Nobody’s been able to reconcile the “good” God with the suffering of everything but rocks

There is a type of opinion which consists of someone saying with perfect confidence: ‘There is no such thing as global warming because it just snowed heavily in New Hampshire.’

It’s always possible they might be right about Global Warming – but the way they phrase the opinion suggests a lack of knowledge. You’ve done this a few times now, and you’ve just done it again. Lots of people are able to reconcile a good God with suffering: Hinduism can reconcile it, Islam can reconcile it, Christianity can reconcile it… but not to your personal satisfaction, because you start from the point: ‘it’s snowing in New Hampshire and Global Warming means it’s hot and sunny all the time.’

‘The problem of reconciling natural evil with a good God’ hasn’t always been a big debate – basically, the debate in Europe starts with the Enlightenment and the movement away from Christianity towards Deism and atheism (traditionally, it tends to be ‘dated’ to the Lisbon Earthquake of 1755). There are earlier theological explanations, but they’re explanations rather than any big debate thingy. The only biggish debate was the very early debate between gnosticism and mainstream Christianity (gnostic explanation: the creator god is eeeevillll or at the very least a bit incompetent).

The ‘problem of evil’ for many religions is that you can have all the philosophical/theological explanations in the world, but they won’t help you comfort two kids under ten who’ve just lost their mother to cancer. Just as you can know everything there is to know about global warming (or global weirding), but it won’t help you with the practical problem of getting out of a snowdrift in New Hampshire. For that, you need a shovel – not the research paper you published last week.

You have to fix your mess before you can get through you incarnations

Yes, perfectly sensible. 🙂 I dunno if you’ve noticed, but I have tried to avoid any massive critiques of your personal-beliefs-that-I-just-happen-to-disagree-with and have tried to stick with areas where I think you’re showing a lack of knowledge about Christian beliefs.

I don’t know if you’ve considered whether personal suffering could be a necessary part of fixing that mess? That is, before they can start the repayment, they have to fix the lack of empathy and compassion that allowed them to even consider shooting someone in cold blood. So they might self-choose to get reborn into a condition of suffering, to learn what it feels like from the inside.

Beware anyone, *anyone*, who claims to “be spiritual”.

Oh, gawd, yeah. We Christians actually got warned about that one (and I’m pretty sure there’s a similar warning in Deuteronomy). I’m certainly not ‘spiritual’. Too bloody arrogant and self-righteous for that. 😀

[Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip]

@craig

Is it possible to say ‘all of the above’?

Well, obviously not. 😀

Logopolis has the disadvantage of including Adric, but the advantage that it’s Tegan’s introduction. Because it’s a regeneration story it has a very dark and gloomy feel to it.

The Deadly Assassin allows us to guess why the Doctor ran away – because the Time Lords are a bunch of complete pillocks! Deservedly a classic, especially because of … but that would be a spoiler. 🙂

The Pyramids of Mars: are you my mummy? Another classic – but haven’t we already seen a Gothic Horror Baker with Talons of Weng Chiang?

Horror of Fang Rock – brilliant, but also Gothic Horror.

Brain of Morbius – Gothic Horror IN SPACE! Advantages: Sarah Jane, Philip Madoc, The Sisterhood of Karn.

The Ark in Space – horror, but not gothic. Very bright Seventies sets which makes the horror element all the more chilling. I’d agree that it was probably a big influence on ‘Alien’, even if calling a horror movie that is really offensive. 😉

Genesis of the Daleks – terrific, though there’s a surprising amount of padding as people get captured, recaptured, captured by somebody else…

Okay, so, my vote:

1. Genesis of the Daleks
2. The Brain of Morbius
3. The Deadly Assassin
4. Anything from the above list. They’re all good.

[TLSass @tlsass]

@purofilion I am new and thanks for the welcome. =)

 

[JimTheFish @jimthefish Time Lord]

@craig — any of those is fine by me but as @bluesqueakpip points out a lot of them fall into the same general vibe as we had last time. I like the idea of doing one from the fag end of Baker’s reign though as it tends to get overlooked quite a lot. The disadvantage being Adric, of course. Out of the ones mentioned above my choice would be Morbius, Mars, Rock, Logopolis, Ark or Assassin. Genesis is fine too but I can’t help but feel it’s been done to death.

Part of me wonders if we should go for second tier Baker stories that don’t get the same attention. Off the top of my head, Image of the Fendahl might be interesting as it ploughs a similiar-ish furrow to the Daemons. Or Masque of Mandragora. Or State of Decay.

[Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip]

@jimthefish

Genesis is fine too but I can’t help but feel it’s been done to death.

I was quite surprised to discover that we haven’t done Genesis here – there is sometimes that feeling that every Doctor Who site in the universe (including alternate universes and n-space) has discussed Genesis.

So, do we just go with the flow? Or be brave and add: ‘the only Who site to have never discussed Genesis of the Daleks’ to our tagline? 😈

[JimTheFish @jimthefish Time Lord]

@bluesqueakpip — yes, I had to think for a moment to wonder if we had in fact done it. I was sure we had. But maybe the the newer members of the forum might have something new to bring to that party. Personally, I think I’d struggle to find anything new to say about it. I had the same sensation slightly during the Daemons too.

[ichabod @ichabod]

@bluesqueakpip  Quite right; that is a failing of mine — falling into the comfortable illusion of being back at college, bullshitting about Big Stuff without a lot of forethought behind one’s statements — so apologies, and I’ll try to avoid that in future.  Here’s what I should have said:

“For many people, myself included, nobody’s been able to reconcile the “good” God with the suffering of everything but rocks.”

Your comment:”The ‘problem of evil’ for many religions is that you can have all the philosophical/theological explanations in the world, but they won’t help you comfort two kids under ten who’ve just lost their mother to cancer.”

In a nutshell.  I think that’s the problem for everybody, and some people find a solution to it — or at least some help in living with it — in religion; some don’t, but that doesn’t mean they stop looking so not being “religious” doesn’t necessarily mean “atheist”.  Which reminds me: what, if anything, do you think distinguishes atheism from materialism?

I do think it’s part of the “fixing” of messes — the discharge of karmic debts — to deliberately take on difficult lifetimes chosen to deepen one’s understanding and empathy.  In fact, I don’t think Karmic payback actually “takes” unless it involves this expansion of empathy and understanding (on the part of both creditor and debtor), all tempering traveling souls toward greater and greater understanding and compassion, for both self and others.  However, the unpredictability of my choices colliding with those of others, or with the laws of physics working themselves out, means that there’s no knowing whether a person’s misfortunes are self-chosen for karmic or other reasons, or truly accidental.  So the default response is, IMO, compassion, though sometimes it is not easy to come up with.

 

[Akuma @akuma]

Hello Everyone… Just poppin in to say hello 🙂

[Craig @craig Emperor]

@jimthefish @bluesqueakpip Last time we had City of Death for Tom, so I thought it might be okay to go back to the Gothic Horror stories – there are quite a lot of them and I like a lot of them! 🙂

I’d be quite happy to avoid Genesis, just for fun. I’m actually quite keen on doing The Deadly Assassin, just because we haven’t done a Time Lords story yet and it might be quite interesting for those reasonably new to Who. But am completely open to other ideas.

[Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip]

@craig

Deadly Assassin was my third choice, wasn’t it?

Personally, I’d rate ‘Genesis’ as a ‘must-see’ for anyone new to Before Gap Who; but I can certainly understand the rest of us going ‘arrggghhhh! I have nothing left to say about Genesis’.

And given that the current plot-line is the 50 year long story of the Doctor trying to find Gallifrey (betcha he doesn’t find it before the 100th), it might be interesting for the newer fan to see what the place looks like when it’s not being blown up by Daleks. 🙂

So if you really, really want to do Assassin – well, myself, I’d say put your Imperial foot down and point out that it is your site. I will happily bow to the wishes of our august Emperor 😀

[JimTheFish @jimthefish Time Lord]

@craig and @bluesqueakpip — as I said, cool with whatever but bearing in mind that we’ve just had a revitalised Master and there is a renewed focus on Gallifrey and the Time Lords then maybe Assassin is actually a timely choice.

And agree with Pip that if our esteemed Emperor’s inclinations turn that way then he should definitely get the final veto…

[Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip]

Totally off-topic (if the sofa has an off-topic) but it occurs to me that if the TARDIS can visit Gallifrey’s past, it is simultaneously possible to have stories set on Gallifrey while the Doctor is still searching for it.

Basically, we can have ‘Gallifrey historicals’ just like we can have Earth historicals. Same ‘don’t change the past’ rules. Though whether this is something Steven Moffat wants to do, or whether he’s just leaving the option open for future producers, I dunno.

[lisa @lisa]

@bluesqueakpip I would like to see more past Galifrey stories too. In fact, I can
imagine how the writers can use all sorts of devices to do ‘Galifrey historicals’.
Also, series 8 was mostly Earth centric so I think its time to see some more big galactic
adventures. I hope! But I’d really like to see some more Galfreyans too and wouldn’t
mind in the least if they showed up in some new surprising regeneration like Missy was.
It would be super fun I think to see something like that happen again.

[@@@@ @members]

Yes, I didn’t think about t by e @ness of my username, but there you go. Thanks for 5 he welcomes.

[@@@@ @members]

Jeepers, predictive text is annoying.

[Anonymous @]

@craig

Hi there, in the joy of placing my own wishes for the Dr re-watch I must have forgotten to press ‘submit’ and then wandered off (so like an early companion!).  So, as I like all of them,  I don’t mind a wee bit what’s finally agreed upon,  but if ‘my arm’s twisted’ then I’d personally go for:

Morbius

Assassins

Ark in Space/Logopolis

But then I like the Gothic horror episodes -of any kind, too

Kindest, puro

[Anonymous @]

@@@@ yes just cancel that account and then start a new one up and then ppl can tag you personally. This is really useful when the new series begins and the  contributions become huge!! It will be hard to search for your name if there’s no tag. But, I also, agree, predictive text =double plus annoying. It’s why I’ve switched it off on my phone.

@akuma welcome to the site! If you go the memories or companions thread you can discuss how you came to watch Doctor Who and what your first memories are of the show, if you like. It’s a good way of welcoming you and finding out which Doctor might be a favourite of yours. Anyway, enjoy!

Kindest, puro.

[ichabod @ichabod]

They’re running DW on BBCA, mixing up episodes from SmithDoc’s era in what seems to be a random order — I caught “Let’s Kill Hitler” followed by “The Girl Who Waited”, and before that something else that I can’t remember the name of, but it was little River being kidnapped by a mean lady in an eyepatch.  More tomorrow — it’s every night for a few hours/episodes, I think.  All that time-jumping plus multiple versions of people was hard enough for me to follow the first time round (I remember seeing every one of these stories now), and I still can’t sort out what comes before what.  I obviously can’t call myself a Whovian; am down with it.

I’m liking Smith better than I recall, and Amy too . . . There’s a lot more “I hate myself” on the Doctor’s part than I’d have thought.  I’ve seen a lot of fannish complaints that while Season 8 promised (and delivered) a “dark” Doctor, there was plenty of darkness about SmithDoc as well, and that’s certainly shown up tonight.

 

[JimTheFish @jimthefish Time Lord]

@ichabod — yes, I’m always bemused when people say that Smith’s Doc is a light and fluffy take. It really isn’t. And for my money, he’s still given the most nuanced layered Doctor of them all. I’m also surprised when Capaldi is said to have taken a turn towards a darker Doc. He’s certainly showing the potential but I don’t think there’s really that much evidence of it yet. He’s a more subdued and laconic Doc, sure, but I’m not convinced by ‘darker’ yet.

On Gallifrey, I do tend to think that physically introducing the Time Lords was in the long-term a bad move in the show. Ultimately it made them a far less impressive force and it made whole Whoniverse a consderably smaller place. Which is why RTD took them out of the equation, I think. And why I think Moffatt won’t be in any hurry to bring them back.

[PaperMoon @papermoon]

@ichabod @jimthefish I also find Smith’s Doctor could be quite dark, and, I think, sad too. The Moment calls him ‘the one who forgets’, but I don’t think he forgets, I think he compartmentalizes. He hides behind the young face and almost slapstick-like behavior, which, I think, makes the times when mask falls stand out even more. I’m thinking here of ‘General Runaway’ in ‘A Good Man Goes to War’, I found his speech and delivery really intense.

[Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip]

@papermoon

I don’t think he forgets, I think he compartmentalizes

I think he compartmentalises so well, he can’t even remember that he’s locked those particular memories away.

I think the thing with Matt Smith was that he visibly grew as an actor throughout his tenure. I’m not sure he could have delivered what he did in The Name of The Doctor at the beginning of his run; that was the result of a writing team who didn’t just do exciting heroic adventures but went into pure drama territory.

Well, pure drama with spaceships and big explosions. 😉 But they took the Smith Doctor through an entire life in one regeneration. It’s a tribute to Matt Smith’s talent that he not just delivered, he grew.

[ichabod @ichabod]

@jimthefish  I found the Time Lords on Gallifrey utterly ridiculous, frankly, and forgot them as quickly as I could; I hope they stay gone for a loooooong time.  Bunch of pompous, puffed-up popinjays!  Of course the Doctor took off, makes perfect sense.  I’ve always had a problem wondering why the heck he wants so badly to go back, the rest of the universe being so much more varied and interesting.  But then, I escaped Manhattan (and the US) as soon as I could, and seriously considered taking a private teaching contract in Africa after two years with the Peace Corps there, as the start of the life of an itinerant expat, like some I’d met on the job — a bit like Old Clara’s post-Doctor life, in fact (but, family).  So I’m just weird, I guess.

I’d much rather see the Doctor head off to try to “fix” some past mistakes (or at least check the later consequences of those mistakes and ameliorate problems he caused if he can) in other parts of the universe, rather than looking for Gallifrey, and a family that a) might well be all dead, and b) he rarely mentions and seems hardly to think about at all . . . ?

@papermoon  Yes, I agree; I realize, re-watching, that what gave me the impression that Smith was all flirty fluff was the whirling dervish aspect of his Doctor — he sometimes seems to be almost jitterbugging through a scene, but with more flailing around, particularly when he’s in the Tardis and doing/plannning stuff.  And he often said his lines so fast, over music that was overbearing, that I had trouble understanding what he had to say.  The impression of giddy youth got in the way of my being able to get the quieter, more intense moments, I think.

I prefer the comparative stillness and containment of Capaldi.  It suggests a more mature and experienced Doctor, and implies a perpetual whirlwind of activity inside the mind.  When he moves, it’s usually a focused and purposeful response to the demands of the moment, rather than a generalized style of wildly shedding extra energy, per Smith.  Interesting difference in these two actors’ decisions about how the character presents physically, and a great way to immediately differentiate these two Doctors, apart from face and costume.

 

[Spider @spider]

Hello all!

Have been away from here longer than I meant to be. Would love to have the excuse of not being able to pilot my TARDIS properly but sadly I STILL don’t own one.

Not caught up on all the discussions but just in passing, I am a big fan of GoT and looking forward to seeing more of series 5! It’s the characters that I love in this … although always careful not to get too attached to them 😉

Been on a bit of a watch-everything-with-Capaldi-in-it phase recently . Currently watching Lair of the white worm that @craig kindly posted up … hmmm … interestingly bonkers so far XD.

Right. MUST try and pop in here again more often 🙂

(\(\;;/)/)

[janetteB @janetteb]

@jimthefish and @ichabod I think the Time Lords were based upon a certain breed of old school European politician. They are clearly a ruling elite who live too long. I think there is a lot of interesting potential backstory that has never been tapped and just because the 70s depiction of the T.Ls was absurd does not mean that any AG depiction might be similarly so, though End of Time, (which like Matt Smith I have compartmentalised in order to forget), does tend to prove me wrong on this. Still Time Lords are only, albeit powerful, faction in Gallifreyan society, the top 2% maybe.

I would like to see a little more of Gallifreyan culture and history, mostly only in order to further expand the Dr Who universe which since AG Who has been mostly limited to earth or future earth colonies. Just as having recurring characters on earth adds depth to the story so would having not simple recurring aliens but alien cultures and political entities which are encountered maybe once a series. Dr Who’s strength is and I suspect always will be, on simple arcs and good stand alone stories. It does not preclude however having complex, recurring threats.

As I have been “lurking” and not posting of late a few things to catch up on. I am happy with whatever others choose as the next story. All early Baker’s are worth another re-watch, and I still have two episodes to watch of The Deamons. I always remember after I have finished my tv viewing for the day.

I have been following the discussions too with great interest. It is such discussion on a diverse range of topics that makes for a truly great forum.

Welcome to new members and welcome back @spider. I am not a Got fan but my two elder sons are so I take an interest.

Cheers

Janette

 

 

[JimTheFish @jimthefish Time Lord]

@janetteb and @ichabod — I’ve always seen the Time Lords as having the potential to be a fusion between Oxbridge, Whitehall and the Vatican, with a bit of Le Carre’s Circus thrown in but the BG series obviously never had the wherewithal to realise this on screen. (And now that we’re having this conversation I think I’ve changed my mind and that Deadly Assassin should probably head our Baker list. There’s so much fertile ground for discussion that ties directly into where the show is now.)

I agree that with the resources the show has now it could probably do Gallifrey quite well and some stories set there could throw up some interesting stuff. But I’m still inclined that they shouldn’t even try. The introduction of the Time Lords, to my mind, had nothing but a limiting effect on the original show. Part of the enduring strength of the Hartnell and Troughton eras was just how vast the universe was to them. Every race was new, very few were aware of the existence of the others and there was always something new to see or experience.

The War Games changed all that and while I’ll admit I loved the finally seeing a bit of the Doctor’s past and seeing the Time Lords at last, I could still see that it diminished the Whoniverse a bit. I think Terrance Dicks and Robert Holmes realised this and they deliberately limited the Time Lords to very small appearances. But by the time we get to the Deadly Assassin and beyond — especially the JNT era — all of time and space has become incredibly parochial, with the TLs as artisocratic overlords and everyone else knowing them, the Daleks at war with them, the Cybermen knowing all about them. They essentially stripped a big part of the sense of wonder away from Who and were, I think, much more effective when they were just invoked by name, an irritating, high-handed presence to shake fists at in impotent fury.

But it seems like an inevitable process in SF shows. The ongoing wonder of the original Trek series was lost when the Starfleet hierarchy made the Next Gen more parochial and mired in politics than it needed to be. And the Reavers in Firefly were positively terrifying when you only saw glimpses of them and had to gauge them by the sheer terror they invoked in people. But once the Reaver storyline was explored in Serenity, they overnight became a bit rubbish.

[PaperMoon @papermoon]

@bluesquekpip – I was pretty much well sold on Smith’s Doctor from the first episode of his tenure. He was certainly handed some great stories.

@ichabod – I agree about Capaldi, he does come across as more intense and focused, perhaps this is why some people find him dark. I don’t myself, but I think that perhaps he’s more self-reflective, for example we have him in ‘Into the Dalek’ asking Clara if he’s a good man. That episode is interesting as we see the Doctor being compared to Rusty and Danny and then we have the Doctor literally entering Rusty, so we get the idea of him trying to work out if he’s a good man or not.

[Anonymous @]

Hello!

Due to the loss of BBC America, I am just catching up to episodes via Netflix and had a couple questions.

First, what is the expression I kept hearing Amy use?  It sounded like “Oy” but didn’t think that was right.

Second, why couldn’t the Doctor go back in time to save Rory? Seems in other episodes the Doctor was able to undo the damage the Weeping Angles did with a bit of time travel.

Thanks for a place to discuss my favorite program of all time.  I started in the 70’s with Tom Baker and was hooked.

Jim

[lisa @lisa]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-manchester-32301419

Doctor Who School anyone? 11 weeks for a college credit folks!

[lisa @lisa]

BTW – this is for all my British friends as the election approaches

Here’s Maggie with some tips for Dave

[lisa @lisa]

But wait there’s more!!

[my niece sent this to me today, she’s another young Whovian initiate]

[janetteB @janetteb]

Another April Doctor. David Tennant’s birthday is the 18th. As I keep saying April is the best month.

@jgstevens Welcome. I began watching in the late 70s when Tom Baker was Doctor as well.

Cheers

Janette

[Azkoth @azkoth]

Hey! I read this is where new members can post. Haven’t been part of a forum in a long time, but I’m a huge Doctor Who fan and wanted to talk to other people about it and maybe learn more about it.

 

Am I posting in the correct place? Just want to make sure I’m starting off right 🙂

[Anonymous @]

@azkoth yes, you can and you have! Welcome. If you like, go to the memories thread and the companions thread and write about how you came to like and know the Doctor.

Jump in!

Kindest, puro

[Schmitty918 @schmitty918]

A really simple and slightly stupid question; It’s not specific to Doctor Who, but it is what got me thinking. What is a good American English synonym for the adjective “cross?” Angry perhaps? I mean I understand it in context it just got me thinking. I know they are the same language, but the venacular is different in the US.

[ichabod @ichabod]

@Schmitty91B   “Cross”?  “Irritable”  “grumpy”  “grouchy”  “tetchy”  — lots; too many, probably.  We used to say someone who was grouchy was “a crosspatch” but I haven’t heard that word in years, and I may never have heard it outside my own family.

Here’s something rather charming:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBmiG64tNLw

My favorite bit: “Dad, be *imaginative!*”

 

[Anonymous @]

@jgstevens

welcome! yes, the expression is ‘oi’.

Rory couldn’t be collected from NY as the Tardis had already been there, there was a ton of time energy ‘invading’ the place due to the Weeping Angels and the Doctor couldn’t return (again) to that time line without causing a tear in the universe. See same when Rose tries to save her father in the Eccleston episodes -the ‘tardis’ goes into protect mode and strange creatures come and ‘feast’ on the people residing within the area where the paradox ‘began’.

[Author]

Posts