S33 (7) 13 – Nightmare in Silver

Home Forums Episodes The Eleventh Doctor S33 (7) 13 – Nightmare in Silver

This topic contains 522 replies, has 42 voices, and was last updated by  Bluesqueakpip 6 years, 2 months ago.

Viewing 50 posts - 451 through 500 (of 523 total)
  • Author
  • #9352
    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    “the potential Doctor” – you mean like final season Buffy with potential slayers?

    @scaryb Not in the slightest. I mean we see Twelve before Eleven regenerates. They would be the potential Doctor because ‘time can be changed’ (TM). If Eleven doesn’t ‘die’, they will never be ‘born’.

    It’s the one thing we’ve never had at an Anniversary Special. We’ve had reunions of the past Doctors. What if this one includes past Doctors – and a future one?

    *P.S. Is it a ship if the characters are married 😕


    ScaryB @scaryb


    It’s the one thing we’ve never had at an Anniversary Special. We’ve had reunions of the past Doctors. What if this one includes past Doctors – and a future one?

    I like that – you’re good! 🙂

    HTPBDET @htpbdet


    the only way the Doctor can die in fact is if we’re in a ‘time can be changed’ scenario – and frankly, Moffat’s already done ‘the Doctor dies’. I don’t think he’s going to be so careless a writer as to repeat that.

    Well, er, No, actually.

    For two reasons – at least.

    Firstly, if there was a 12 regeneration rule it is this, as Engin said in Deadly Assassin:

    After the twelfth regeneration, there is no plan that will postpone death.

    So far, the Doctor has regenerated ten times. So there are two to go in any event.

    Secondly, death can be postponed: by stealing someone else’s body (Keeper of Traken); by being granted a new regeneration cycle (The Movie); by exposure to the TARDIS (River Song); by receiving regeneration energy (from River)

    That’s assuming that it was a rule anyway. Engin was a stickler for detail. So, if the Time Lord way was 12 regenerations and then into the Matrix for posterity, Engin would express himself that way quite understandably. The Matrix rule meant you died after 12 regenerations and went into the Matrix and no plan could postpose that because it was “the law”.

    But that doesn’t mean the Matrix rule was the final word – just as the rules say “You must obey the first law of time” or “You must stop at a red light” – sometimes the rules can be broken. Rules provide order – and the Doctor is an agent of chaos when it suits him.

    And, aside from all of that, there is another, even better, timey-wimey way…In Planet of the Spiders K’anpo Rinpoche gave the Third Doctor’s regeneration a push – in the same way, an earlier version of the Doctor could give Doctor 11 a push if he needed it…

    But, better than all that, is to just to take  Troughton at his word. In Power of the Daleks he told Ben and Polly that

    That’s it. I’ve been renewed. It’s part of the Tardis. Without it, I couldn’t survive

    As far as any of us know, no Time Lord has travelled for so long inside a TARDIS. Most Time Lords just watch and do not interfere. River Song proves that sustained exposure to the TARDIS can give regenerative powers – in her case, because she was conceived there. Perhaps in the Doctor’s case because he has travelled for so long.

    I have always taken the view that as long as he is inside the TARDIS, he will be able to regenerate because the TARDIS will sort it.

    Of course, if the TARDIS is destroyed…

    (PS Sorry @phaseshift for being the Continuity Nerd)


    HTPBDET @htpbdet


     I don’t know. I saw some difference between ‘Mels’ and ‘River’. They shared traits, which they would, having at that point exactly the same memories, but I do think they were different ‘people’, and ‘Mels’ was no more the Doctors River Song then Ten was Alex Kingstons’ River Songs’ Doctor.


    But, of course, Mels did not know the Doctor, had been brainwashed to kill him and had never met and fallen in love with him. So there was bound to be a difference between Melody and the River Song we see in Silence in the Library and afterwards.

    But in Lets Kill Hitler, Kingston played Melody, not River – they left Melody with the sisters to be raised/trained and she turned into River Song.

    And like any Time Lord regeneration, there was a personality difference between Melody (Whatever number she was, sounded like at least two, possibly three) and the Melody played by Kingston.

    I hate thinking about Lets Kill Hitler, but I think that is right.

    Miapatrick @miapatrick

    @htpbdet– yes. I think there was a personality difference between ‘Mels’ and her regeneration, and I also think that River Song was greatly influenced by her encounter with the doctor- thinking back, didn’t ten stick his duplicate in another universe  because he realised this was the duplicate of himself at the start of his time- before Rose had a chance to influence him- in the hope Rose could do the same to this version?

    Maybe the reason the doctor is so attached to the human race, and ‘human’, and interfeariey, is because he’s tending to imprint on the first person he meets after he regenerates, and transfer this onto subsequent companions- which is why eleven is told not to travel alone, by River who would know from experience that brand-new regenerations are quite susceptible to outside influence?

    ardaraith @ardaraith

    @miapatrick I dont mean the personality didnt change, or she only changed shape, I am referencing the attitude toward regeneration. @whohar and @scaryb were discussing the apprehension on the part of a time lord to regenerate, because it was “a more fundamental process than just changing shape.” Yet, Mels, and her new face, seemed to express just this attitude, e.g., “I’m focusing on a dress size.”

    ScaryB @scaryb

    Hmmm @ardaraith

    Romana also went through a few potential regens before she settled on one. Maybe it’s an extra talent that only female Timelords have?


    HTPBDET @htpbdet

    @ardaraith                True enough. although, interestingly, the only other woman we have seen regenerate had much the same attitude: see Romana in Destiny of the Daleks.  🙂

    Miapatrick @miapatrick

    @ardaraith– ah, I get you. But I interpreted the idea of timelords ‘apprehension’ to regenerate, and it being a ‘more fundamental process than just changing shape’ to mean the end of one personality to make way for another. If I had the choice of dying, or regenerating into another person who happens to have my memories, I’m not sure I’d see much difference to me personally, if my own individual consciousness was gone either way. So regeneration would defiantly be a last resort.

    I think the ‘dress size’ comment was just a dodgy aside…

    SatsumaJoe @satsumajoe

    @ardaraith @miapatrick Interesting. Perhaps it’s slightly different as, even with that ability, Melody/River was originally human? Or, well, she just wasn’t bothered! A young ‘Time Lady’ with no real sense of what it meant to change.

    Miapatrick @miapatrick

    @satsumajoe– true, and @ardaraith is right about how unbothered she seemed about it.

    I wonder if, despite being ‘raised’-ish by Amy and Rory, she was still so under the influence of her brainwashing as to see herself mainly as a weapon, rather than a person. River, in the library took her death more seriously (of course that was death without regeneration).

    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    @htpbdet – I don’t really mean a natural limit physically. The thought in my mind is that there was a natural limit mentally; there was a point – different for each Time Lord, but generally around no. eleven or twelve – where the different personalities cannot be contained and their version of dementia sets in.

    It certainly wasn’t television continuity; that’s why I was wondering if it was something I’d read in The New Adventures.

    The ‘madman in a box’. That’s something that’s been hiding in plain sight since The Big Bang; Eleven is convinced he’s gone nuts. His mirror in The Crimson Horror: Mrs Gillyflower, who is completely bats.

    ardaraith @ardaraith

    @htpbdet and @scaryb – Hmm, indeed. Interesting that Time Ladies appear to have a different perspective on the change of regeneration.  That’s a concept that could be applied to human women, as well.  We can often be more aware of change (just look at all the changes our bodies go through, birth to death) and more adaptable to it, perhaps because it is so intimately tied to our biology, as it were.

    SatsumaJoe @satsumajoe

    @bluesqueakpip where the different personalities cannot be contained and their version of dementia sets in.

    The ‘madman in a box’. That’s something that’s been hiding in plain sight since The Big Bang; Eleven is convinced he’s gone nuts. His mirror in The Crimson Horror: Mrs Gillyflower, who is completely bats.

    Much like the initial behaviour of Ganger Doctor? Horrendous thought.

    ScaryB @scaryb


    where the different personalities cannot be contained and their version of dementia sets in

    That’s neat. Human dementia = not enough memories; TL dementia = too many memories

    @ardaraith re special talents for female Timelords – more likely vestigial sexism in the scriptwriters LOL (And refusing to acknowledge the phrase  time ladies isn’t canon btw, just my own personal prejudice 😉 ) But I’ll happily go with biology  :mrgreen:


    Anonymous @

    @whohar and @scaryb – Re the multiple takes on 10’s ‘I don’t want to go!’, that was in Confidential.  Are the full 45-minute Confidentials available anywhere?  I only have one box set, 9 and Rose, and it contains just the ‘Confidential Cut-Downs’ i.e. the 10 – 12 minute versions.

    Although, perhaps even the cut-down – if that is all one can get with 10’s boxsets – still contains those multiple line takes.

    Miapatrick @miapatrick

    @ardaraith– that is interesting, but I’m not sure I like it as part of Who.

    I don’t really like it when television- or other things- divide people into two groups and say: women as a rule do this/feel this, men on the other hand do that/feel that. And Moffit seems so far to have avoided gender stereotypes to a degree- that is, Amelia ‘counted as a boy’ as a child, Rory became a nurse. In TDW, we’re told that at least one TimeLord switched sexes.

    If there is a difference between the Doctor and River and Romana, is it necessarily gendered? Not having watched much old who, I’ve only really seen the doctor, River and the Master. Three Time Lords, none of which are considered particularly sane (mad man in a box, bespoke psychopath and, well the phrase ‘box of frogs’ comes to mind, respectively.)

    Lula @lula

    @Shazzbot  (and everyone else) I have it on DVD–the multiple takes of “I don’t want to go!”  It’s on the DVD set called, “The Complete Specials,” which is separate from the Series 4 set.  It does have the entire Confidential from The End of Time, and it does have Tennant filming that final scene, but rather than showing each specific take, they feature RTD and Tennant discussing how he’s going to utter the line.  Also shown is Tennant looking at monitor playback after each shot, giving his feedback to Euros Lynn (director), with more discussion about how they want that line to be played out.

    So you do see him uttering the line in different manners, but as it’s been a while since I’ve watched that ep of Confidential, I’m pretty sure we don’t see each specific take.


    ardaraith @ardaraith

    @miapatrick – I also prefer my entertainment to be free from gender stereotype, unless there is a reason for it.

    ScaryB @scaryb

    @ardaraith @miapatrick @lula

    It’s also very easy to accommodate it thro @bluesqueakpip‘s theory that the regenerations get more complicated when you get into double figs, or maybe the Dr just being older and more widely time-travelled means he has more limited options. We have a very small sample to work from and they may all be atypical.

    I’m with @htpbdet – “I don’t think I have ever met a continuity “error” which I couldn’t accommodate (if I was in the mood to bother with such things)”

    Not sure @phaseshift‘s going to be too happy with “the phrase “a box of frogs” comes to mind” hehe 😈

    PhileasF @phileasf

    My typically long-winded thoughts on regeneration:

    The first two ‘regenerations’

    I’ve always been fond of the notion that Pertwee -> Tom Baker was the first time the Doctor regenerated.

    The 1st Doctor said he was ‘rejuvenating’. This was handled very ambivalently by the show (in Patrick Troughton’s first serial, The Power of the Daleks). On one hand, saying he’s ‘rejuvenated’ encourages the audience to believe he’s the same person and he’s just become younger; on the other hand, the story goes to some lengths to emphasise that he’s a different person now, which is expressed visually by the old Doctor’s ring falling off the new Doctor’s finger. His companions, especially Ben, initially reject him as an impostor, because apart from his changed appearance he also behaves like a different person. Ben has to be won over by seeing the new Doctor beat the Daleks. No doubt the program makers were hoping the audience would follow Ben’s lead, and he was standing in for an expected audience reaction against the new actor.

    [Hmmm…. that’s right, the first Doctor had a ring, which was sometimes made a big deal of in the first four seasons. And Clara has a ring… and the grandfather has rings… Too much data… Theory fatigue setting in…]

    In Patrick Troughton’s last story, again no one says anything about him ‘regenerating’. The Time Lords say he’s changed his appearance before, and he’ll change his appearance again. For all we know, they might have just changed his face… except that fairly soon we once again discover that he’s a completely different person now.

    (As an aside, one of the first great bonkers theories was that, just before the 2nd Doctor was forcibly regenerated, a Time Lord faction rescued him and sent him and Jamie on their way, sometimes sending them on secret missions. It was only when that incarnation approached its natural end that they sent him back to the ‘execution chamber’ to be regenerated, with the rest of the Time Lords unaware they’d been tricked. This is about the only way ‘The Two Doctors’ can be made to make sense.)

    It was in Planet of the Spiders (Pertwee’s last story) that ‘regeneration’ was first mentioned. (Or was it the next story, ‘Robot’, that coined the word?) (As an aside, I once read an article that claimed the word ‘incarnation’ was popularised by Doctor Who; that previously it had been a fairly obscure word that might only be used in a context of discussing eastern religions that incorporate the idea of reincarnation. Since the mid-70s it’s entered wide circulation, and its meaning has broadened.)

    ‘Spiders’ retconned the previous changes to the Doctor, making them ‘regenerations’ too, so that what happened at the end of that story would seem like a natural event for the Doctor, something that had happened several times before. But really, it was at this time, 11 years since the start of the series, that the idea of regeneration was first devised.

    The above is a bit… academic, I suppose. It arises from the way the original series was being made up as they went along, and later hands formed the past into a coherent narrative that wasn’t always there at the time. Terrance Dicks, the script editor at the time of the Pertwee regeneration, was arguably the first ‘modern’ ‘producer’ — I say ‘producer’ as his role as script editor would nowadays make him a producer or executive producer. As well as being a script editor, he’d started writing novelisations of the earlier stories in his spare time, and he also wrote one of the earliest published episode guides, as a chapter of his book ‘The Making of Doctor Who’. So he was the first ‘producer’ of the show with a high level of awareness of the past. He was the first fan producer.

    Anyway, although you could interpret the first three Doctors as being all one incarnation, I expect the series will now always treat them as three different Doctors.

    Ten’s end

    As for Ten’s regeneration, I thought his not wanting to go was symptomatic of his fatal character flaws (basically, his massive ego). But at the same time he inspires sympathy. It’s a great performance. Pertwee’s regeneration, in particular, was entirely the opposite. Although he seemed at least as egotistical as Ten, his last story was all about the conquest of ego by sacrificing the self, and he went out pretty serenely.

    Four’s fall

    I agree with @htpbdet that the Tom Baker regeneration wasn’t very well handled. He was _the_ Doctor throughout my childhood, and it seemed an unsuitably unheroic ending — just losing his grip on a cable. IIRC his death didn’t achieve anything; the universe was already safe at that point, and if he’d lived nothing would have been different. His death isn’t ‘necessary’ to the story; it only happens because the actor’s resigned, and in any other story he’d have walked away. Given my respect for the author of Logopolis, I’ve always imagined the regeneration scene must have been written by the producer.

    Nine’s demise

    I felt much the same way about the Ecclestone regeneration. All that time energy only kills him because the script says it must, and the script says so because the actor resigned. The deadly time energy out of the TARDIS is a sci-fi concept with sci-fi properties made up on the spot to satisfy a story need. The RTD series in a nutshell. (If the actor hadn’t resigned, they could have told the same story, and ooooooh, had the Doctor channel all that energy into a black hole or something. There’s something very wrong with that kind of storytelling.)

    With Tennant, again I felt… ‘What, he’s killed by really REALLY bad design? This ridiculously contrived machine with the locking cubicles?’ Another diabolis ex machina. In too many episodes, including these most significant episodes of the series, there’s a machine at the end of the episode, and it kills the Doctor or saves him, depending on whether the actor’s resigned or not. (Yes, I’ one of those people who complain about dei ex machinae. It’s the single biggest weakness of the new series, and much less a problem now than it used to be.)

    Good and bad regenerations

    The only really ‘satisfying’ regenerations, to my mind, have been Pertwee’s and Davison’s.

    In each case, they willingly sacrifice themselves in a way that seems entirely plausible; they don’t require some implausible contrivance like the locking cubicles in The End of Time, or some new sci-fi concept introduced because it’s time to kill the Doctor.

    I acknowledge that a lot of this perception of ‘satisfying’ endings comes down to subrational impressions; spectrox toxaemia also only kills the Doctor because the script says it does. What makes it work as a story ending is the skill of the writer.

    Based on what I know about the world, I can accept that lots and lots of radiation will kill the Doctor. And the situation that exposes the Pertwee Doctor to all that radiation seems entirely plausible. And that he willingly walks into it for various reasons seems dramatically satisfying and right.

    Likewise, I can accept that there’s a poison that will kill the Doctor, and that he might sacrifice his only chance of survival to save his companion from the same poison.

    In contrast, I don’t have any opinion about time-energy and whether it might or might not kill the Doctor. Its properties were introduced to me just moments before they caused a dramatic change in the story. And the locked cubicle is similarly outside all personal knowledge and experience; and it just seems highly implausible. And I’ve seen the Doctor hanging from so many high places and surviving unscathed, that you need to show me a really good reason why this time he falls. And you didn’t.

    Seven’s regeneration (though I barely recall it, being unfond of the telemovie) is something different entirely, and probably all the better for it. When the Doctor sacrifices himself in an implausible way, it feels (to me) like a hollow pseudo sacrifice; this regeneration works, as I recall, because it isn’t a big dramatic sacrifice, but an accident. He was such a portentous character, it feels appropriately ironic that he die in such a meaningless way.

    In short, when introducing a really substantial change into the show, I think the standard of storytelling has to be a lot stronger than the rest of the time. An ordinary episode can (maybe) get away with a few button presses making all the Daleks for light years around explode; but don’t kill our main character with a piece of made-up-sci-fi dialogue. When an ending really matters, I want it to be real.

    HTPBDET @htpbdet

    @phileasf  Can I trouble you to repost that here:


    Its a great post – and contains much to discuss…at length…


    Miapatrick @miapatrick

    @scaryb– well, I could have said ‘bonkers as a bath full of fish’ if I had dared! 😉

    Craig @craig

    @Shazzbot @whohar @scaryb @lula etc.

    I have been sent a link to the 4 versions of Tennant’s “I don’t want to go” by another Craig who is, of course, unable to sign up at the moment. I hope he will join us after the embargo on Saturday. You do get to see all 4 versions.

    WhoHar @whohar

    @craig thanks for the link.

    @phileasf thanks for the regen post.

    @everyone_else thanks for the really interesting discussion.

    Anonymous @

    Thanks @craig

    P.S. Just when you thought ‘Penultimate Night Syndrome’ might set in and leave the comments here thinner than they should be, the Guardian goes and posts this ‘article’:


    From the ‘Whovians’ paragraph:

    “Fans of Doctor Who. May dress as their favourite incarnation of the doctor. May prepare recipes from Dining with the Doctor: The Unauthorised Whovian Cookbook (sample dish: Big Brother House Bad Wolf Brand Human Chow Cookies). May also produce hand-drawn fan art of the doctor’s companions and post it on Tumblr. Do not enrage them by abbreviating “Doctor” to “Dr”, referring to the companions as assistants or claiming that you like Peter Cushing best. This is just asking for trouble.”

    Not that there’s anything wrong with that. (TM Seinfeld)

    blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave

    With the last episode imminent, I suppose now is the time to nail our colours to the mast with our personal bonkers theory. I will (you will no doubt be pleased to here) put my Ted Peate cricket theory to one side.

    I will, however, still stick to my theory that Clara is the daughter of the Doctor and River, which I have been banging on about for quite a while.

    Mrs Blenkinsop and I came up with an incredibly complicated explanation of how this could be explained last night in our local wine bar, that involved Gilbert Ryle’s theory of the ghost in the machine, Marshall McLuhan’s ideas about the relationship between electronic media and reality, and, with the aid of some shiraz and a quite nice chardonnay, we felt we were getting closer to explaining how Clara could have somehow been born in the library and yet became flesh and blood.

    Over breakfast, it seemed less brilliant. But how often the things one says in a wine bar seem less brilliant over breakfast.

    Anyway, I still remain attached to the Clara-as-daughter bonkers theory.

    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    Well, given MY bonkers theory: we were all looking at the regeneration between Ten and Eleven, but has anyone checked out the three images of the three Claras that appear in the Doctor’s mind at the beginning? Because the change between them looks awfully like – regeneration energy.

    Same colour, same flame like appearance. Not as blatantly powerful as the Ten to Eleven regeneration, but by then the Doctor is trying to convince Mr Clever that he can burn the cybermites out of his brain.

    On a minor note, the design of the Doctor’s CyberController headpiece is a genuinely beautiful piece of art. It looks like a tiny dragon; or possibly a little snake.

    Anonymous @

    OK, @bluesqueakpip – I’ll see your dragon, and raise you the Chinese-themed market where Donna ended up with that time-bug on her back.  Both the dragon and the snake are iconic avatars in the Chinese calendar.

    I fear this is just artistic symmetry, though, and not relevant to the plot for Saturday.

    I also feel hobbled by not having viewed @ardaraith ‘s pictures from the spoiler thread (which to be fair, probably emanate from the BBC in some form or another so are only spoilers in my most strict of definitions).

    I’ve been enjoying the blog posts and their comments.  After this Saturday when the marvel / degredation / frustration [delete as appropriate] has fuelled theories galore but which must sadly fade over the 6 empty, yawning months before us … these blogs are going to be my fuel.  Not just for DW memories but for the stories they tell, and how those stories relate to each author’s life and world-view.

    I’m starting to think that TNotD will have its work cut out if it wants to compete with what people have been posting on the blog threads – because these here are uttery fascinating.

    WhoHar @whohar


    I’m starting to think that TNotD will have its work cut out if it wants to compete with what people have been posting on the blog threads – because these here are uttery fascinating

    Well said.

    Bonkers Theories


    I’m going for this:  the Doc has created Clara (she is unaware of who /what she is) to store his memories because he is in fear of  the Trenzalore question and knows this will be the only way to answer truthfully (ie without lying). Because of this he’s forgotten who Clara is; however she is programmed to know she’s done a good enough job (of wiping his memories) when the Doc can’t remember something really significant (eg his wife). In the meantime, the GI have somehow intercepted his memories and corrupted them. Clara re-uploads the corrupted memories into the Doc and is then made real via GI / Ganager / Tardis tech. The GI are now able to take control of the Doc. This revelation of Bad Doctor is the cliffhanger into the 50th.

    In true Moffat fashion, this leaves plenty of loose ends; consider it my homage 🙂



    blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave


    Well, I confess that your bonkers theory does have the strength of a good cliffhanger into the 50th. But, although I cannot put my finger on exactly why, the idea of the Bad Doctor, just doesn’t seem, well, right to me. A Doctor who doubts, a Doctor who has a dark side that is brought out under exceptional cirumstances (ie, Toby Jones, and they have done that), or a Doctor who can seem to be stern and unfeeling–all of these I can buy, but a genuinely Dark Doctor? I just cannot reconcile that with everything the the past 50 years of “Doctor Who” conjurs up for me. But, I suppose, that does qualify as a “game changer”. Just not a game changer I feel all that comfortable with.

    Which leaves me with a fundamentally good Doctor, who has been (ever since Moffat started writing him) a lonely figure. Moffat’s Doctor started back in “The Girl in the Fireplace” being described as a lonlely child who has carried that loneliness with him. In my bonkers theory, the game changer is that he discovers the child he never knew (we know he had a grand-daughter, but not a child) Moffat timey-wimey. I think the game changer will be when he realises Clara is that child, and if I am right, there won’t be a dry eye in the house.

    But how that sets it up for the 50th, I confess I have no idea!

    I hope you enjoy the episode from your vantage point in the southern extremities of our colonies on Sunday evening. I will be raising a glass to you and all my fine friends on this board. And it will be EXTREMELY difficult to resist reading this board on Sunday morning colonial time when everyone else will have already seen the episode. But I must resist. I must!!

    WhoHar @whohar


    Yes, those extra few hours are going to be…difficult. Fortunately I’ll be asleep for some of them and then the UK will be asleep for some too.

    It is very tempting to look at the, er, alternatives, to see if I can view it early.

     I will be rasing a glass to you and all my fine friends on this board.

    And I will be raising a Jammie Dodger in repsonse (trying to get healthy 🙁 )

    WhoHar @whohar


    If the final ep does turn out as I’ve described, I won’t know whether to feel happy or sad that I’ve got it all correct.

    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    I’m starting to think that TNotD will have its work cut out if it wants to compete with what people have been posting on the blog threads – because these here are utterly fascinating

    Ah, yes. Nearly time to let the leaf of infinite possibilities become all the might-have-beens and never-were’s. Nearly time to let it burn up – in a manner significantly similar to the energy of regeneration. 😀

    janetteB @janetteb

    Like the other members of the night shift, I will be finding it difficult to resist the temptation to read comments on Sunday but I will share in that toast on Sunday night. (umm. Must buy some Jammy Dodgers, now I know what they are.)

    I’m sticking to my Clara as a creation of the Tardis idea. Possibly there are alternate time lines. (I love alternate time lines) or maybe it keeps spitting out replacements when one dies. I will settle for her having been generated by River Song, to ensure that the Doctor is never alone, knowing that she is soon going to the Library. Clara is her parting gift.

    Much though I would love to see the return of Susan I don’t think that is going to happen, not until the anniversary special anyway.

    I agree with @blenkinsopthebrave re’ the Dark Doctor. I also don’t really trust MOffat’s claims that there is going to be a major game changer. I think any game changer will be minor. He does tend to exaggerate.

    My only theory about the importance of the Doctor’s name is that it will unlock the time lock thus unleashing the Time Lords and that could well be the game changer as the Doctor is no longer the lonely last survivor and the Time Lords might well want retribution for having been locked away and had their planet destroyed.

    Have loved all the wonderful bonkers theorising. There are a few top story ideas in these threads. Moffat take notice..




    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    My predictions for the finale:

    Nothing much will happen until the last few minutes of the episode beyond everyone asking what the Doctor’s name is, and River Song assuring us it Should Never Be Told. No, Really. It Should Never Be Told. You Don’t Want To Know.

    The audience will agree with her. They Don’t Want To Know. Really.

    There will be much use of virtual reality, and people will apparently die all over the place. Then we’ll find that Nobody Died.

    In the last five minutes we’ll discover that Clara ‘Oswin’ Oswald is a future incarnation of the Doctor. With a mighty cry of ‘NOOOOOO! Stephen Moffat can’t write strong women characters!’ the Eleventh Doctor will refuse to regenerate, reveal his name as Bluntwin Hootwhistle, and open the Time Lock on Gallifrey by speaking his name aloud.

    After a few seconds where everyone stares in disbelief (and the audience go ‘Well, that’s a rotten name’), River will inform the cast that things have not only gone timey-wimey, they’ve also gone wibbley-wobbley and broken the glass portal between realities. All realities have now become as one.

    Eleven (after his battle cry of: ‘I can out-act David Tennant any day!’) will scream ‘I DON’T WANT TO GO!’, and run off in the TARDIS, turning into Dark Eleven on the way. Jenna-Louise Coleman will say ‘WTF? I’ve got a contract for Series 8!’ River will grab her by the wrist and use her Time Agent’s time-bracelet to haul her off to Trafalgar Square and the 50th Anniversary Special. The last shot of Eleven will be his manic laughter as he giggles ‘And they thought Ten’s Farewell Tour was long? They’ll be lucky if they can get me to regenerate by Christmas!’

    Strax, Madame Vastra and Jenny will have to walk home.


    Dr-Clara @dr-clara

    I love all the theories, and the fact that I expect none of them to be right, including my own.

    But for what it’s worth I’m sticking with it: Clara is the Doctor. Quite possibly the eleventh.

    “Who is Clara?” isn’t the question. It’s the answer, hidden in plain view:

    Q: “Doctor Who?”
    A: “Who is Clara.”


    ScaryB @scaryb

    <now mopping massive splutter of coffee off desk and computer screen. Thank you @bluesqueakpip >



    Miapatrick @miapatrick

    @bluesqueakpip– brilliant.

    Only now you’ve put that in my head, all I want for the 50th episode is David Tennant and Matt Smith face to face in a massive act-off.

    (Moffit being Moffit though, we could well discover that Eleven’s entire run has been his farewell tour.)

    blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave


    Fabulous! You made my day!

    WhoHar @whohar


    Of course, if now his name isn’t Bluntwin Hootwhistle, I’m going to cry my bloody eyes out

    thommck @thommck

    Nice ideas everyone, @bluesqueakpip seems the most logical at the moment!

    My final NotD bonkers™ theory, although after reading it through it sounds more like a bit of bad fan-fiction!

    At the beginning of the episode River Song meets the Doctor & Clara by the Leadworth duck pond. They can hear something calling him and they discover the pond is actually a portal to a pocket universe.

    They travel into it and discover it had led them to Trenzalore, where the Paternoster Gang has been trapped after Strax accidentally drives them into the duck pond in Victorian times. Realising the Doctor can’t be here, River has tries to kill him again. The Doctor is OK with that because he’s had enough but Clara (the ordinary human girl) tries to save him by throwing a chair at River. River & Clara end up killing each other which causes a paradox (because River is supposed to die in the library).

    The Doctor tries to fix it by making a deal with the GI to re-download Clara and River into his sonic screwdriver in exchange for his name. This will give the GI access to his memory, including the bit that the Doctor blocked from the Cyber-planner, thus giving them the secrets of the timelock and timelords (which will be lead to plot of the 50th). Jenny tries to stop him and is forced to reveal she is his daughter (from The Doctor’s Daughter episode). He ends up whisking the gang out of the pocket universe before it closes but Vastra gets left behind and dies.

    Using spoonhead technology & the TARDIS Arch-Recon the Doctor recreates River & Clara although something goes wrong and Clara gets scattered across time. He gives them new River the sonic and says that will be the last time they meet. Jenny is his new companion and Strax goes to be the Maitland’s new nanny

    I think we should get a point for each prediction we get right and then see who the winner is 🙂

    ScaryB @scaryb

    It’s fascinating that since AotD we’ve evolved many, many, MANY theories (and lost very few (never let it be said we’re not kind to our old theories!)), observed lots of clues, tropes, fishy things, ducks’ eggs machinations, possible loose ends… and I would say we’re an optimistic 1% closer to solving Clara’s mystery than we were then!


    So – big question for me – will we see Clara’s mum again? Will we ever find out why she felt she could so rashly promise that she’d find Clara wherever she is? (And why she didn’t find her daughter  in AotD)?

    @thommck – award all the points you like – but just don’t deduct any for wrong ones or I’ll end up with -100!


    ScaryB @scaryb

    And I’d like to propose that @miapatrick‘s phrase – bonkers as a bath full of fishes is now adopted as official replacement for mad as a box of frogs as the standard measure for ultimate bonkers-ness 🙂

    ardaraith @ardaraith

    Clara’s mum is….. The Doctor !!

    After all, he says that kind of stuff all the time, like when he told Amy he would find her daughter.

    Ok, my household’s collective theory is that sometime in the future the Silence become all powerful, because the Doctor never went to Trenzalore.  In fact, in that future the Doctor is dead.  So, Clara is sent back throughout time to find the Doctor when he is still alive, and shape his path toward Trenzalore, so the question can be asked.

    And further household speculation, that I can not support (lol), is:

    In AoTD, the Dalek’s actually implant Clara into the hive mind in order to help the Doctor get to Trenzalore.  (don’t ask me how this makes sense)

    That Clara is a flesh body in TS.

    That Clara is actually the Doctor’s wife, from Gallifrey.

    SatsumaJoe @satsumajoe

    Well… As the series has focussed on memories, mentioned two ‘names’ (as in reputation) of The Doctor (is it The?), had Clara splintered in time and seen a timeline repeated until it was ‘fixed’, I have a little theory.

    The Doctor is called to Trenzalore by, it seems, The Whispermen (mirror to Silence?) to answer that mystery question. If it is what the title says it is, it’s defining himself as one of those Doctors. Why has he run from that? Well, that’s beyond me really. Could be setting a thing in stone, authority, that. Because it’s a place where truth must be told, he also learns what Clara is/becomes from that splintering. Perhaps he ‘fixes’ that so it didn’t (well, doesn’t) happen. She lives on as present Clara.

    The Silence (who I think are still about, just as he is) sought to stop it being answered as, if he chose the first meaning, the original meaning, that would cancel their reason to exist – their endless war. They’d fall. It would also mean River never became a weapon and possibly that Rory never punched Hitler. Unsure what other effects that timeline editing would have though.

    I bet that’s much too simple and I’ve missed something (or several somethings) important. That’s what I do.

    Oh yeah, do we know any dead characters? Living creatures may not speak falsely or refuse to answer.

    ardaraith @ardaraith

    @satsumajoe – OH!! Could Clara be either RiverSong OR RiverSong’s granddaughter from an alternative timeline?? If the Silence never existed, then River would never have been taken from Amy and Rory.  Thus, when they were zapped back in time, they would have had little Melody with them.  Perhaps Melody grew-up, had a daughter, and that daughter became Clara’s mum??

    In that alternate timeline, River would not know the Doctor.  Not really.  Her only knowledge of him would be through stories.

    thommck @thommck


    Oh yeah, do we know any dead characters? Living creatures may not speak falsely or refuse to answer.

    K9? 😛

    ScaryB @scaryb

    Just reposting – summary of most of our collected theories about Clara – feel free to add, delete or otherwise amend

    Clara could be (in no particular order) –

    A key (or has the password)

    A fake or a forgery

    A ghost

    Normal human who has meta-crisis/time fracture either by accident or as choice to save the Doctor

    The Doctor (past, present or future)

    The Doctor’s daughter (Susan or Jenny), or granddaughter

    The Doctor’s mum, sister or any other female relative

    The Rani


    A Time Lord, inc the Corsair (love that one)

    A reincarnation of any previous companion (anyone but Mel!!!!)


    River’s daughter or mother

    The (or a) Tardis

    A construct by the Tardis


    The Master

    A trap

    A solution

    A D*M

    A computer programme

    A computer virus

    A computer upload

    Dr Who the programme/all the Doctor’s memories

    A Zygon

    A Dalek

    God/the universe

    A present to the Doctor from the universe

    None of the above

    WhoHar @whohar


    And I’d like to propose that @miapatrick‘s phrase – bonkers as a bath full of fishes is now adopted as official replacement for mad as a box of frogs as the standard measure for ultimate bonkers-ness :-)


Viewing 50 posts - 451 through 500 (of 523 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.