Spoilers (3)

Home Forums General Spoilers (3)

This topic contains 1,031 replies, has 45 voices, and was last updated by  Craig 2 years, 11 months ago.

Viewing 50 posts - 551 through 600 (of 1,032 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #60030
    MissRori @missrori

    @nick No, it probably won’t be a straight retread of the RTD years — if only because that’s not what the mainstream audience wants at this point either.  Sci-fi/fantasy television has changed quite a bit since the revival began, after all; the scale is getting bigger, the universes are getting more complex (and often intertwined, at least in the U.S.), etc. and I think retooling Doctor Who is going to involve acknowledging that, perhaps seeing what currently-trendy elements might be workable in the Who setting, as per a more “audience friendly” approach.

    Chibnall has said that a lot of options are on the table, such as a single storyline unfolding over the season rather than an arc woven in and out of it, which would fit the idea of a less character-driven Who…

    @jimthefish, the disaster of the Colin Baker years has been discussed fairly well over at the AV Club website (see their Doctor Who (Classic)  reviews).  There was a genuine risk involved in moving from the youthful, amiable Fifth Doctor to the more abrasive Sixth Doctor, and a tonal shift for the show into more violent adventures akin to what was going on in non-Spielberg science fiction of the 1980s (which was pretty dystopian).  It just wasn’t pulled off well on a creative level, but it wasn’t playing it safe either.

    It will be interesting to see what risks are taken and which ones aren’t with Series 11…we will have to see.

    #60031
    blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave

    @nick
    I agree with you. I think it is premature to assume the worst. And if CC’s stories become more adventure/mystery based with a more “fun” Doctor, I see that as no bad thing. As much I love Moffat’s writing, I really think there have been way too much emphasis on death and dying in the last thee years. And the self-doubt of the Doctor, and the angst over the Time War and his past has also started to pall (for me, anyway).

    There is, I assume, about 9 months before we see the new Doctor in a CC story. It would be a real pity if we psyched ourselves into a mood of foreboding during those nine months.

    It looks like there will be more death coming on Saturday, and emotional and tearful goodbyes at Christmas, but, maybe, fun and adventure in 2018. I say, let’s embrace that prospect.

    #60032
    MissRori @missrori

    @blenkinsopthebrave I agree that there was more doom and gloom in the Twelfth Doctor seasons than usual.  It frustrates me too, because it’s clear from the expanded universe the character can work in lighter stories (see Titan Comics for instance), and more TV episodes of that kind would have allowed breathing room.  Still, Xmas will be a fun sendoff even with tears.  🙂

    #60033

    Oh for heaven’s sake.

    The last episode had a 22% share, which is incredible for a non-“talent” show-in-a-plurality of channels era, and Eastenders gets barely a quarter of what it got in the days of only-one-way-to-watch. DW is still one of the BBC’s most valuable properties.

    And seriously: Chibnall brought in to be a safe pair of hands? Please.

     

    #60034
    Craig @craig
    Emperor

    @pedant U OK hun?

    #60035

    @craig

    No. It’s still Friday. Why did nobody tell me this?

    #60036
    JimTheFish @jimthefish
    Time Lord

    @pedant– Chibnall is totally a safe pair of hands. He was one of the key writers of the RTD era, which I suspect is one the Beeb would like to get back to in spirit at least. He was also exec producer of Torchwood and has experience of exec duties on Law and Order and Broadchurch. There were probably more creatively interesting choices but who did not have the perceived managerial chops — particularly as SM definitely had a phase of going through exec producers and having a reputation of being managerially ‘difficult’.

    @missrori — I’m ashamed to say that I’m old enough to remember the casting of C Baker and there was a definite tone of cockiness, if not outright arrogance, emanating from the publicity office at that time and I vividly remember the announcement and interviews with both JNT and Baker at the time in Doctor Who Monthly (before it became Magazine) and the vibe as I recall wasn’t of risk but overweening confidence. Baker didn’t even really have to audition for the job. I think Davison was definitely considered a risk, and one that was considered to not particularly paid off and that Baker was a ‘back to basics’ Doc, despite the homicidal instability of this character. The advent of Baker, I think, marked the beginning of JNT’s most hubristic era and which eventually ended up with the show being cancelled.

    @nick and @blenkinsopthebrave — I agree that we shouldn’t damn CC before he even starts — and it certainly wasn’t my intention to do so. And I also agree that a lighter, more fun, tone could just be what the show needs after the sombre Capaldi years. I’m just maintaining a slight scepticism, that’s all. But I’m more than looking forward to eating my stylish raspberry beret in a year’s time. And I’m looking forward to seeing what he does.

    However, he’s not known for subtle, but maybe subtle is not what is required now. And I fear there might be a tendency to overcompensate for the perceived darkness of the last three years. We could be in for CC’s Graham Williams years to SM’s Hinchcliffe ones.

    #60037
    MissRori @missrori

    @jimthefish  Ah, I was not even into Who back in those days, but yes, I can see where they would have taken that tack too.  My apologies.  I try to defer with those with experience.  Nothing to be ashamed of!  😉

    Also, that’s an interesting comparison point — certainly the Hinchcliffe years are the closest tonally to Capaldi’s tenure.  I found a lot to like about the Graham Williams years, so that will be interesting if that turns out to be the case with CC…I am certainly interested about where it’s going.

    #60038
    JimTheFish @jimthefish
    Time Lord

    @missrori — well, I hope that didn’t come across preachy or lecturey. Not the intention.

    And yes, it’s certainly going to be interesting to see where the show goes now. It’s always fascinating when Who acquires a new voice and direction.

    #60039
    blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave

    @jimthefish
    You’re right–it is a stylish raspberry beret!

    It is up there on a par with @chickenelly‘s bow tie and pipe. Talking of which, where is the old crowd? Have they drifted away because of the show or, heaven forbid, because of us? Are our musings less witty and incandescently brilliant than they used to be? Mine, almost certainly. (I blame it on my loss of access to the Qantas Club Lounge.)

    #60040
    Craig @craig
    Emperor

    @blenkinsopthebrave I do miss some of the old crowd. Who knows why they haven’t come back, or have only popped in infrequently? May be partly my fault not keeping new posts going through the fallow period. May just be that the fallow period was just a bit too long, or may just be, like with some of my friends that I don’t see so much anymore, that real life gets in the way.

    I’m sure your cellar must make up for the Qantas Club Lounge.

    #60041

    @jimthefish

    But with the exception of Law & Order, his shows have a fairly auteurish quality (and both the biggees show the risks – neither Broadchurch nor Torchwood sustained themselves very well). And if it is true that he has decided bring in his own team, then I doubt he is going to be that much interested in formula (“safe” is a multi-faceted concept). Although I share your caution about him, it’s not really about the idea that he might be kept in a creative straitjacket, but more a tendency he has to batter a narrative to fit a point he is trying to make.

    #60042
    blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave

    @craig

    Well, what access to the Qantas Club Lounge implied was that you were about to fly (in Business class) to some interesting part of the globe, and your employer was paying for it! The cellar alone is poor compensation, believe me. But, I am now hanging out on an island full of jazz clubs and professional baristas, so there is not much to complain about.

    I am sure your analogy about what happens to friends over time is an apposite one,and I certainly wouldn’t feel that it was because you hadn’t maintained the site. I also wonder if the early days need to be understood in the context of where we had come from. The site was established as a haven from the toxic wasteland elsewhere on the web, and it was both exciting and novel to be part of a like-minded community. But one cannot maintain novelty indefinitely. Having said that, I still find it the most welcoming and interesting place on the web.

    #60043
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    Bonkers:

    Chris Chibnall’s radical revamp Act 1 Scene 1:

    (A bathroom. A young lady enters. We see from her perspective. Music is being whistled from within. We see the lady’s hand pull the shower door back. We can now see inside a man with his back to us scrubbing himself. The tune is Colonel Bogey. He turns around and gives a wry smile. It’s Tom Baker!)

    Doctor 4: So it was all a dream, eh? Let’s keep calm & carry on shall we?

    bobby

    #60044
    MissRori @missrori

    @jimthefish No apology needed.  I like what you have to say!  🙂

     

    #60045
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    Bonkers:

    Everything aired since An Unearthly Child episode 2 has been a deception in the Matrix, placed there by The Valeyard.

    vale

    #60046
    Craig @craig
    Emperor

    Thank you @blenkinsopthebrave. We’ve had our highs and lows in our immaturity. And we’ve seen people come and go, some of whom I’m very sad for their leaving.

    I’m so glad you still find it a great place to visit. We have lost some of the old guard but some of the new regulars have fitted right in and added to it. I feel the same as you, which is why I carry on doing this (as well as because of my love of Doctor Who). We have a small but vibrant community and I think everyone who contributes enjoys visiting here and adds something special.

    I do love you all for all the contributions and I hope it will continue for a long time.

    #60047
    Nick @nick

    @jimthefish @pedant @missrori @blenkinsopthebrave

    I’m not exactly looking forward to CC (and will be even less so if the next Doctor turns out to be formulaic) because I watched all 3 series of Broadchurch. His stated aim (showing the impact of major crime on the victims) was well enough done, but the surrounding investigations were a complete mess saved by decent acting. It’s not so much his idea(s), but delivery. I also wonder if the show runner should concentrate a bit less on writing stories and more on the larger, creative picture.

    #60048
    Nick @nick

    @craig

    I second @blenkinsopthebrave sentiments and your own. I suspect we all do.

     

    #60049
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    I wonder if Chibbers will once again give us a Doctor who’s happy to kill murdering perverts like in DOAS?

    brad

    #60050
    MissRori @missrori

    @craig  Thanks! I do feel happy to be here and enjoy all the chatter.

    #60051

    @nick

    Yep. Season 2 of Broadchurch relied far too heavily on Plot Mandated Stupidity, especially re the two QCs – presented as shit hot, with one coming out of retirement to take the case but both behaving with mind-melting idiocy, because CC wanted to make a point about the arbitrariness of the legal system.

    I’m less concerned about the writing/ running thing (that’s the modern, American-led, model and works perfectly well in many shows) than that he has someone willing to say “OI! Chris! Noooo!” when he gets too heavy handed.

    I sense that there is a …hmm vibe, for want of a better term… that there is a hankering for something radical in the choice of Doctor and that a conservative choice could, paradoxically, put him under more pressure than being bold.

    #60052
    Nick @nick

    @pedant

    A few years ago, I have to say that I thought the Doctor was a male role that should stay male (even though I watched Romana as the prototype female Doctor), but things move on. My opinion has changed. I will be very disappointed with someone like Kris Marshall (or the list @wolfweed posted). Not because they aren’t suitable, but because its passed the time that something different was done. I don’t see any real excuses for more of the same.

    #60053
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    Series 11-15 New Format:

    The Doctor resolves his adventures with a ball of string in a different way each week.

    string

    #60054
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    @nick

    If it was Helena Bonham Carter, they could get Tim Burton to direct…

    #60056
    Nick @nick

    @wolfweed

    LOL. At least that would be very different.

    #60057
    JimTheFish @jimthefish
    Time Lord

    to echo @craig and @blenkinsopthebrave on this little corner of the internet. But I too definitely miss some of the old names. Maybe one day they shall come back. Yes, they shall come back….

    @pedant and @nick–

    I’m sure CC will be given a free hand in forming his vision for the show (although with qualifications. I don’t think anyone of the Who showrunners have had an entirely free hand. iDaleks anyone?) But I’m sure we’ve all had jobs where no instructions/orders have been issued but we’re still pretty clear what the boss is expecting of us.

    @pedant has pretty accurately identified one of my key reservations about CC — narrative craft and logic is sometimes ignored in favour of either a particular extra-narrative point or it is sacrificed for the sake of some big ‘moment’ that may or may not make sense in the wider story. My other reservation is that he might not be temperamentally suited to running Who, given the tantrum he threw around Broadchurch Series 2. On the other hand, maybe that kind of bloody-mindedness is just what’s needed to keep the moaners in check.

    Also agree with @pedant that a more vanilla choice of Doc may make CC want to be more radical in other ways. And starting off a new era in a slightly defensive position might not be the best idea. It’s also not good for a new Doctor either. Say it is Kris Marshall, is he going to be looked at as ‘the one they got when they bottled out of something more adventurous’.

     

    #60058
    JimTheFish @jimthefish
    Time Lord

    @nick–

    I agree. With the best will in the world to Marshall et al, I think someone too old school Doctor-ey will ultimately hurt the show at this point. It’s gone past that. Largely, because with Gaiman and SM having spent so much time laying the groundwork for significant change, it would just look like cowardice or lack of conviction if they settled for a Tennant/Smith clone now.

    #60059
    Nick @nick

    @jimthefish

    I’m sure we’ve all had jobs where no instructions/orders have been issued but we’re still pretty clear what the boss is expecting of us.

    Trump/Comey eh ?!

    #60060
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    Bonkers:

    The new Doctor will be invisible & silent, so as not to offend anyone…

    no offence

    #60061
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    Finale ep is 1 hour 1 minute long…

    #60062
    blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave

    @wolfweed

    The new Doctor will be invisible & silent, so as not to offend anyone…

    Now that was brilliant!

    #60068
    Anonymous @

    @blenkinsopthebrave

    Talking of which, where is the old crowd? Have they drifted away because of the show or, heaven forbid, because of us

    You said it. This is Thane typing  for Mum. I as Thane won’t be doing this anymore -too busy and also not happy. Not really.  So, bring it:

    I wasn’t going to say all this but I will. I really bloody well will.

    We’ve had “death and dying” is “sooo bad so we need lighter shows” –reason 1 why regulars aren’t hanging about.

    2. We’ve had the same old bloody argument about Who being a “sad, show with no % of views” even though very clever people who have lately been dissed have repeatedly stated the actual % of ‘this little show which could.’ Such repetition has the ability of pissing regulars off. They don’t want the same old arguments.

    3. We’ve had several posters completely taking over the site with long and rather tedious explanations about information which isn’t knowledge or fact.

    4. We’ve also had (and this is somewhat worse) a feeling that if you don’t actually tag people and be “oh so incredibly nice” that  you’ll be chucked off……At times if people do suggest something in a moment of fierce debate that’s GOOD, not bad! It’s the basic Socratic style.  It might cause a person or persons to feel a bit ‘weird’ but that’s analysis so let’s get back to it! Please?

    5. We have certain people (moderators/and one or two I shall not name) who write: “this was a better episode, a much better episode than two years ago” and no-one says what apparently they should. Which is this: “huh? how come I can’t say a negative thing and yet this person can, and in fact, repeatedly does exactly that?” So, we have a double standard.

    6. This leads to my next point: this is EXACTLY AS IT SHOULD BE. If a person wants to be black and white, let them. If a person wants to be a grumpy uncle, let them. If someone wants to engage by using question marks because they’re young and nervous, invite them to speak LOUDLY.

    7. I understand this place isn’t for “university educated PhDs every day of the week” and that’s obviously fine but  evaluating what we see is important.  We shouldn’t be pathetic, we should use gifts to explain and to listen.

    8. As to the people who do ramble on about the same thing: “the Doctor is sad and lonely” etc should actually listen to, read and try and understand what others are actually trying to explain. And I get it. I do. People don’t change their minds. They almost never do and yet this place I found nearly 4 years ago caused me to change my mind. I learnt about shows I’d never heard of, my heart was opened up to writers of Doctor Who that I’d never even  considered for a muddy second. But it’s changed. Most definitely. And I find that upsetting. Some of the regulars have made it clear that “misery and doom” is no longer acceptable for Who; that hubris has killed it outright. My response: what SHIT! It’s not doomed. Misery exists so get over it. If you want rainbows and angels watch 75 other shows that provide that.

    Anyway, this is long and no doubt will piss everyone off. So be it. Also, if  you don’t like it -don’t read it but I reckon you should. At least try.

    Puro and Thane

     

    #60072
    Anonymous @

    @blenkinsopthebrave

    I apologise if that seemed to be directed at you? Not at all! I simply wished to answer the question and it came out raw and rough: which is, at least sometimes, necessary.

    Puro.

    #60075
    ichabod @ichabod

    @jimthefish  . . . I’m probably being a doom-meister here but sticking a floppy-fringed white dude in the TARDIS and getting Chibbers to produce something that resembles Who By Committee is the quickest way to ensure that it doesn’t make it through the next five years.

    Absolutely agree — except that in fact those choices might just work very well in overseas markets, and maybe even at home in the UK with a larger, more general audience.  This be parlous times, and going for the reassuringly familiar might actually work very well — for a bit, anyway — for lots of people with the (completely justified) jitters.

    Just when we all *need* to be thinking boldly, not self-medicating with Sugar Pops.  Personally, I don’t see Marshall as our man.  IMO, he’s a pretty good example of “bland”; maybe even “blank”.  I don’t see anything interesting there; but maybe that’s the point, if they’re intending to back off character work.  But does Chibnall write rip-roarin’ two-fisted action tales no deeper than a superhero comic page?  That’s not the impression I’ve gotten; dullsville, rather (although Broadchurch 3 has just been announced in the NYT today as starting in July, with blurbs suggesting that it’s good).  Who Nose.

    Anyway, I’ve had my fun; three years’ worth, and it’s been damn good fun, give or take a few sinkholes here and there . . . in no small part due to having this excellent venue for discussions of it.

    @nick   Agreed; I’d watch for Bill, even if the Doctor himself becomes somebody I can’t give a hang about.  I hope Chibnall has changed his mind and asked her to stay on.

    #60076
    janetteB @janetteb

    @thane15 Really sorry you feel let down by the site. Yes at times the discussions do run on and sometimes I tend to skim over them because at core the site remains what it always was, a place where a group of like-minded people get together and share our love of Dr Who. I often tend to be a bit distant when the show is airing and discussions running hot, feeling that too much is being said and I either have little to add or contribute. Sometimes the discussions don’t really engage me but there is always another discussion going on elsewhere on the site that does.

    I hope you won’t be away for too long as you are so valued here.

    @blenkinsopthebrave I visit the site, many times a day, whenever i need an excuse to avoid what I should be working on. I really enjoy being part of the community here.

    I think we are all feeling a bit on edge at the moment especially with news outlets saying that tonight is the final episode for both Peter and Moffat. I thought they were both doing the Christmas Special. Will feel very cheated if we miss out on one more outing with them both.

    Into the void with fingers crossed.

    Cheers

    Janette

     

    #60077
    Cath Annabel @cathannabel

    I miss some of the original contributors too – but I don’t think it’s down to a problem with the site or its current contributors.  I’d guess it’s just, well, events.  Life ‘n’ all that.  I post less than I used to, despite having more free time – partly at first it was the novelty of having a haven from the toxicity of the other place, somewhere I could say what I thought not without encountering disagreement (that would be soooo boring) but without being sneered at or ridiculed or told to go away and read Freud or whatever.   It’s also often that by the time I watch the episode, you lovely lot have been all over it and there’s nothing new for me to say!    But even if I drop back to the sidelines I’m still part of this place, I feel at home here.  My idea of home is not a place without argument.  (This year I celebrate 40 years of marriage to the most argumentative man in the universe  and as they say, it takes two…) But it’s a place where you can argue without treating the other person with disrespect, without disparaging their views or suggesting that they’re not qualified to express them.  By & large, that’s what it’s like here.  Anyone can be tetchy once in a while, and some of us are more inclined to tetchiness than others but hey, that’s like home too.

    So anyone thinking of dropping out, please don’t sever links, we don’t want to lose your input here (that means you @thane15 and Puro).  It all feels very unsettling at present in the Whoverse, with what we know (losing PC and SM), what we think we know (losing PM and MG) and what we don’t know (Who will be Who).  We might need this place even more!  Long may it be a place where we can bicker amicably, exchange bonkers theories, and generally share our passion for this silly old tv programme with others.

     

    #60079
    Craig @craig
    Emperor

    @thane15 and Puro

    I don’t agree with your analysis at all. Then again, maybe I’ve taken my eye off the ball as I’ve been busy with a lot of other things up till now. I finally have some free time just as the current series is ending. Great! 🙂

    I think we’ve had a lot of great analysis on this site recently from lots of different posters – there are almost 300 posts about the latest episode, for example, from a load of different people. No one is completely taking over the site as far as I can tell.

    If you’re not nice you’ll be chucked off? Whoever said that? There are currently only two moderators – me and @jimthefish – and we have a very light touch. No one has ever said anyone else would be chucked off. At least, not to my knowledge. I do like people to be civil to each other – that’s always been the case – but I’m not going to chuck anyone off.

    Similarly, who said you can’t say you didn’t like an episode? On the Etiquette page it explicitly says you can say you didn’t like something, as long as it’s constructive and not just “Worst episode ever, Moffat must go’. There is absolutely no double standard.

    Both points above I actually take personally because they do not reflect my moderating style or the aim of the site I set up. Again, all I’ve ever asked for is a bit of civility.

    And I really don’t know what your first point and your last point about needing lighter shows and misery and doom not being acceptable is all about. I think almost everyone thinks this series has been one of the best and the last episode, probably the most downbeat of the series, has been the best. Who said misery and doom is no longer acceptable? Maybe I missed those posts.

    But you are, of course, and as always, entitled to your opinion.

    #60080
    Nick @nick

    @thane15

    Puro and Thane

    I wasnt a start-up user here, but I was very happy to find it fairly early on. I lurked for quite a while before I dipped my toe and actually wrote something, feeling rather out of place with what was often very erudite discussion. I wonder whether this can be off putting to some. If so, I encourage everyone to say their piece. This one place, where you will be space to say what you think without being shouted down or abused.

    For a mixture of reasons, some work related, some Who related (Moff’s vision if I’m being honest), I didn’t catch much of either S8 or S9 and missed out on all of the discussion here, which I certainly regret now. After popping in here, a couple of episodes into s10, I was happy to find that the forum was pretty much the same place it was back in 2012/13 (fewer voices notwithstanding), somewhere that @cathannabel has just described so well. I don’t know any of you personally, but I would (and did) certainly miss reading your thoughts and observations. In my opinion, that is what makes this place special.

    In the spirit of friendly disagreement, aren’t your points 6 and 8 (rambling on about the same thing) contradictory ? Not that that matters in the slightest.

    As @cathannabel wrote, It all feels very unsettling at present in the Whoverse, with what we know (losing PC and SM), what we think we know (losing PM and MG) and what we don’t know (Who will be Who). Even a poor change can seem better with hindsight:

     

    #60081
    MissRori @missrori

    @thane15  Thane and Puro, I’m sorry if any of us were too troublesome for you.

    #60082
    JimTheFish @jimthefish
    Time Lord

    @thane15–

    Like @craig, I’m afraid I don’t recognise that analysis of the site at all. First of all, I can’t recall anyone ever being chucked off the site at all, (barring spammers). I can’t even recall the threat of such action ever being issued. In fact, I think we’ve done very well in almost never having to get too heavy with anyone while still managing to maintain a civil and respectful tone to all members, old and new.

    Also slightly bemused by the ‘double standards’ line. Argument and debate are the lifeblood of this site — so long as it’s backed up by argument. That’s always been the case. It only takes the most cursory look through any of the threads to see a healthy diversion of opinion and it’s thankfully almost entirely thoughtful and respectful.

    And when you get down to it, all that’s being asked for, that disagreement and debate and argument are fine but that politeness and basic civility are maintained, that everyone’s views are respected and that they feel they have a space here in which to express themselves. And I genuinely can’t see that being ‘oh so incredibly nice’ is not something that we shouldn’t aspire to.

    Frankly, I too find it hard not to take some of the above personally. But if you have issues with the tone and content of the site then please do PM either @craig or myself and we’ll always do our best to address it.

     

    #60084
    JimTheFish @jimthefish
    Time Lord

    As an addendum, I posted this back before the current series started and suggested that it was something that we should always keep in mind when interacting on the forum. It seems appropriate to repost it now. It’s from Peter Capaldi reacting to the bullying of a Who fan.

    “The essence of Doctor Who is kindness,” said Capaldi, “that is what really is underneath all of this.

    “This is a person who moves through time and space and history, and all kinds of situations, and reacts to them, ultimately – despite the way the different versions of him may appear – he reacts with kindness.

    “And that is how everyone involved with Doctor Who should be and how everyone who is a fan of it should be.

    “If they’re not kind, they’re not receiving the show in the proper way and they’re not really a fan of it.”

    #60088
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    Perhaps the titular Doctor who falls is ‘Doctor Who’ (i.e. Missy).

    In the same way that ‘The Magician’s Apprentice’ was probably not Clara but Davros…

    dr who

    #60090
    MissRori @missrori

    I’ve been thinking this for a while, @wolfweed!  😀

    #60092
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    If Luke Treadaway is number 13, I suppose Mini Matt Smith will have to go & live in a foreign embassy…

    treads

    #60096
    janetteB @janetteb

    @cathannabel Well said. Having just had one of those nights where a family game turned into a family battlefield, and ended up in lots of discussion which hopefully was beneficial to all concerned, your post had extra relevance to me. This forum is not unlike family and yes, at times there are conflict but we forgive, learn, grow, move on better for the experience, hopefully.
    @wolfweed they look depressingly like a football team.
    cheers
    Janette

    #60099

    @cathannabel

    with what we know (losing PC and SM), what we think we know (losing PM and MG) and what we don’t know (Who will be Who).

    You are Donald Rumsfeld AICM£5.

    #60130
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    So was the DWM thing a wind up?

    Maybe Stephanie Hyam is 13?!

    Shooting series 11 is due to start in November, so surely the secret cannot be kept?

    Is that the sound of Zoe Ball slowly defrosting?

    All will be revealed…

    Don’t think we’ve seen the last of Missy & the Master yet either (another lie?)…….

    #60133
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    I wonder if we’ll hear Ben & Polly at the end of the Xmas ep?

    Perhaps the BBC will spend a 100 million groats on CGI versions (only kidding)…….

    b n p

    #60150
    JimTheFish @jimthefish
    Time Lord

    @wolfweed — that’s an amazing find. And illustrates why Who was in B&W in the 60s — the fashions were too awful to be seen in colour….

Viewing 50 posts - 551 through 600 (of 1,032 total)

The topic ‘Spoilers (3)’ is closed to new replies.