The Day of The Doctor – The 50th Anniversary Special

Home Forums Episodes The Eleventh Doctor The Day of The Doctor – The 50th Anniversary Special

This topic contains 963 replies, has 80 voices, and was last updated by  Craig 7 years, 10 months ago.

Viewing 50 posts - 301 through 350 (of 964 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #12766
    ScaryB @scaryb

    @Bluesqueapip @htpbdet

    So the tomb must be the tomb of a later Doctor or Smith later in his time…Only if we presume that the Doctor never repairs that crack in the window of the TARDIS. The one he got when he forced the TARDIS to fall onto Trenzalore. The one he’s only just created, in fact…Did she return to Trenzalore before finally shutting down? In the forlorn hope that maybe, just maybe, the Doctor and Clara had managed to escape the time-track?

    That’s an excellent point and one I had not considered. Yes, that is quite possible and suits Moffat’s pre-occupation with paradoxes and aborted timelines.

    My brain’s now tied in knots, but does the body of the Dr not need to be placed in the Tardis (as his tomb) in order for the “track of tears” to be created, in the way that he needs the Tardis to regenerate?  Why was he killed this time? Did he  chose not to regenerate?

    #12769
    PhaseShift @phaseshift
    Time Lord

    @htpbdet

    Hmmm. If I can interject here:

    What do both Madame Kovarian and the Silence try to do? They try to kill the Eleventh Doctor. Kill him in a way that will stop him regenerating.

    Do they? When do they reveal that?

    If you see a problem with the contention that the plan was, in fact, to “Kill him in a way that will stop him regenerating”, can I ask you to explain what alternative you gleaned from Series 6?

    I’m interested.

    #12770
    HTPBDET @htpbdet

    @phaseshift

    I think @bluesqueakpip has the view that the Silence/Kovarian forces wanted to kill the Eleventh Doctor to prevent him from regenerating into a future Doctor.

    It just seemed to me they wanted to kill him – for what he was and had been, not particularly for what he might become.

    To kill the Doctor necessarily means preventing him from regeneration. Well, in my view anyway.

    The nuance is about intent/motivation. Revenge or Pre-emption?

    Having the intent to kill based on how you are is different from an intent to kill based on who you might be – and I think that is the point we are discussing.

    But I may have mis-read @bluesqueakpip‘s views and I may have entirely missed a nuance in AG Season 6.
     

    #12781
    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    @htpbdet – slow and steady. Don’t overdo it.

    But I only ever take the televised episodes as having anything to say on any given topic. (Sorry!) 

    Alas, the Great Continuity War between the GI and Clara has blown that one right out of the water. What we have seen is not always what has now happened. And the point that the novelisation and the televised episode differ now merely means that there were at least two versions of that particular reality.

    But anyway: even if the televised episode is the current continuity – the Valeyard is clearly not imitating a living statue in Covent Garden, so he’s not a ‘Watcher’ like figure. Is he a Cho-Je-like projection? Because if so – then he has the appearance of one of the Doctor’s incarnations.

    I agree with McLeela that there might be a natural limit to regenerations, and that the more a Time Lord regenerates, the more likely it becomes that they will have a regeneration in which everything they try to suppress decides to come out to play. And we’ve seen a projection of the Doctor’s darker side (the Dream Lord) – and he’s not nice.

    I think it’s going to be a question of ‘which story is more interesting to tell?’. The one where we stick to strict continuity? Or the one where we go with the alternative continuity (which went on record in the novelisation) that one of the Doctor’s future incarnations goes dark side?

    The assassination attempts are pretty specific. The one at Lake Silencio ‘kills’ the Doctor, then shoots him again in the middle of his regeneration – preventing it from completing. The poison used in Let’s Kill Hitler will specifically prevent a regeneration. In both cases the plots are rather convoluted – there must be other ways to kill Time Lords.

    But if the people planning this fear a regeneration more than they fear the Doctor escaping, then you can see that both methods are chosen because they’ll specifically prevent a regeneration.

     If you can be bothered to give me the time codes of when they are sighted, that would be greatly appreciated. J

    McGann and Tennant are both very brief: McGann is a blur running across the screen at 00:01 in the California shot, almost immediately followed by Troughton running across the screen in the opposite direction. The only way you can spot it’s McGann is that you can just see the wing collar.

    Tennant is 00:35 – he has his back to the camera. I think the shot is of the Library. but it might possibly be New Earth. Clara is centre-screen, red dress, toolbelt. 

    That the Doctor loves River is pretty clear – when you consider that he’s someone who’d rather die than say ‘I love you’ in public. They’re a couple whose natural relationship is one of arguing and making up. But from Time of Angels/Flesh and Stone you can see in the Doctor’s behaviour that he’s someone who knows, just knows, that he’s going to end up with this woman. And he knows damn well that for her, it’s already happened. And it’s annoying him.

    As @scaryb says, from River’s point of view, she’s considerably more insecure than she makes out, because she’s figured out that the older she gets, the less the Doctor will love her – because they’re meeting in the wrong order; as she gets older she’s meeting him earlier and earlier in their relationship.

    I don’t think River knew what was going to happen at Trenzalore

    I think River did know what would happen at Trenzalore, because she explains very precisely to Clara what’s going to happen. And then she behaves towards the Doctor as if – well, as if this was the moment she didn’t want to happen. She wants to keep him from Trenzalore, she wants to keep him from going into the time-track. But once his decision is made, she relaxes.

    Mind you, the kiss might have helped. 😀

    Regarding the Daleks – from the perspective of the Daleks, they came first. When the Hartnell Doctor meets them, he doesn’t seem to know who or what these creatures are. It’s not until Invasion of the Daleks that the Doctor decides to fight them rather than just escape from them.

    @scaryb – the Doctor very specifically says that people shouldn’t have expected a body in his tomb. I think we do now have a problem in that the ‘track of tears’ has just become the serpent swallowing its own tail; that’s probably why it’s collapsing in on itself. It may be that the Doctor going into it has created a paradox, or it may be that the living ‘track’ was always safely stored in the TARDIS somewhere. Once the Doctor is dead, however, there’s no one to protect it – it has to be sealed in a ‘tomb’ until the scars of his passing heal.

    I think the reason we’re going to meet Rose and Ten is because the Doctor now can’t escape his own time-track. He needs a TARDIS, he also probably needs someone who might be able to help him. And if Hurt is the real Nine, he needs a post Time War Doctor who knows what happened; somebody who knows ‘the secret’ because it’s also his secret. Had Eccleston been willing, we probably would have got Nine and Ten. Hey ho.

    #12812
    HTPBDET @htpbdet

    @bluesqueakpip

    Wise words…
    The assassination attempts are pretty specific. The one at Lake Silencio ‘kills’ the Doctor, then shoots him again in the middle of his regeneration – preventing it from completing. The poison used in Let’s Kill Hitler will specifically prevent a regeneration. In both cases the plots are rather convoluted – there must be other ways to kill Time Lords.
    But if the people planning this fear a regeneration more than they fear the Doctor escaping, then you can see that both methods are chosen because they’ll specifically prevent a regeneration.
    To kill a Time Lord you must stop him/her regenerating, otherwise it is just the incarnation that dies. So every attempt to kill a Time Lord must, necessarily, involve stopping a regeneration or the Time Lord is not killed.
    That is my starting point.
    I just do not see that anything Kovarian/Silence et al did or said indicated that they were trying to prevent the arrival of a future evil incarnation of the Doctor. They just wanted to kill him – to stop the endless bitter war (whatever that was). So it seemed they were after him for things that he had done , not things that he might do.
    I quite see that it could well be as you put it, and, indeed, I rather like your way of looking at it, I just can’t see any evidence that your way is the way. But I may well be missing something.
    Thanks for the timecodes – we will look! 🙂
    If you assume the Valeyard was a Cho-Je like projection, then he could look like the 13th incarnation or, perhaps, depending on which incarnation you are dealing with interacting with him, his appearance could be different – that is, he looks unformed to Tom Baker because there is not much of him accumulated from the first three Doctors, but if Davison had seen him he would have looked different and when Colin Baker sees him he looks different again – so that when Smith sees him he will look different again.
    I’ll come back to you about River and the rest…
    Cheers

    #12842
    HTPBDET @htpbdet

    @bluesqueakpip

    Thanks again for time codes – we found Tennant. We had thought that was Rory!

    And we found the possible McGann – we had thought that was the GI…

    Cheers
     

    #13129
    Anonymous @

    Hello all! Long-time Whovian (grew up watching Tom Baker) but new to this forum.

    Here are some of my theories:

    The leaf the Doctor sent to Clara in the timestream wasn’t actually Clara’s leaf. It was his memory of the leaf (“everything in here is me”). He was there when the leaf brought about the meeting of Clara’s parents, after all.

    Dr.Hurt is not a future Doctor. The Doctor’s timestream contains both past and future, but only the past is accessible. If the Doctor could see events from his own future, it would create fixed points, which would ultimately lead to paradoxes. We’ve seen in the past that the Universe doesn’t like paradoxes.

    This leaves Dr.Hurt to be a past Doctor and brings up the question of why Clara didn’t see him while moving through his timestream.  This can be explained by considering the reason why Clara jumped into his timestream in the first place. The GI was trying to destroy the Doctor’s legacy – “to turn all his victories into defeats” – so it would naturally have left the hour of the Doctor’s greatest shame alone. Since the GI never meddled with the Dr.Hurt period, Clara would never have needed to visit it to set things right.

    So, what did Dr.Hurt do that was “not in the name of the Doctor” and needed to be buried as deep as it could go? Clearly it wasn’t ending the Time War, since the Doctors since have talked about that, but it could have been (as some have mentioned) starting it, or some horrible (but apparently necessary) acts committed during the war. Or it could be whatever caused him to steal the Tardis and leave Gallifrey in the beginning. Or whatever drove the Silence to despise him and want him dead.

    Speaking of the Silence, what about their prophecy? Does the “fall of the eleventh” have to mean the death of the 11th Doctor? Fall could have other meanings besides death and it doesn’t specifically say that the 11th is the 11th Doctor. Dorium Maldovar said that the Silence’s prophecy should be translated as “Silence must fall when the question is asked” (which implies that the Silence want silence to fall, preventing the question from being answered); could his version of the question be a misunderstanding too – that the real answer to be avoided isn’t the Doctor’s name, but something deeper – his fundamental identity? In the 1st run of the show, we get introdudced to 2 “founding fathers” of the Time Lords – Rassilon and Omega – but it’s hinted that there was a 3rd, who may in some way have been the Doctor (in Silver Nemesis [7th Doctor], Lady Peinforte claims to know the secret of the “nameless doctor”). Could he have done something in this earlier personna that made a complete identity make-over essential?

    #13133
    Anonymous @

    That all being said, I hope that Dr.Hurt is a Time War-era Doctor. (Late #8, I’m thinking. John Hurt does look like he could be an older Paul McGann  – the Doctor has been aged inside of a regeneration before, most recently by the Master during “the year that never was” – and  it would avoid a messy re-numbering.) It would set up a perfect opportunity for a spin-off or miniseries centered around the Time War.

    #13135
    overunder @jamesunderscore

    @MadScientist72 – I think if they were going to have an older eighth doctor, then they probably would have hired Paul McGann to play the part himself – he is, after all, nearly 20 years older now than when he last played the part and still plays the role in audio dramas.

    Also, Eleven explicitly acknowledges Eight as “The Doctor” when giving info to the Cyber Controller, whereas he says that Hurt is not “The Doctor”, although still him.

    I really like your point about the leaf – although Clara isn’t aware of it, this is a memory that she and The Doctor share. It’s a nice reminder of how they mirror each other – both present throughout each other’s lives, although only aware of that at particular times.

    #13140
    Anonymous @

    @jamesunderscore – Maybe McGann wasn’t available. Or being aged figures in an important way into the story and McGann didn’t look old enough (i.e., they needed an apparent age difference of significantly more that 17 human years).

    As far as 8 still being the Doctor, what I’m suggesting is that he did something(s) in between when we last see McGann at the end of the TV movie and when he became Dr.Hurt that effectively rendered him “unworthy” of the name from that point until his regeneration as Chris Eccleston.

    #13142
    Anonymous @

    @MadScientist72 – welcome to our forum!  What a great first post.  There have been so many bonkers theories ™ flying about regarding the 50th, but you have a neat insight:

    The GI was trying to destroy the Doctor’s legacy – “to turn all his victories into defeats” – so it would naturally have left the hour of the Doctor’s greatest shame alone.

    Yes indeed, with that theory, Clara would of course never have seen that version of ‘the Doctor’ whilst in 11’s timestream.

    In bringing up Silver Nemesis you out yourself as a BG (Before Gap [that horrid wildnerness between the McGann movie and Eccestone]) afficianado.  What are your own personal memories of Doctor Who?  You say you grew up watching Tom Baker, so does that make him de facto ‘your’ Doctor?

     

     

    #13143
    Anonymous @

    @Shazzbot – I would indeed be a BG’er and, yes, Tom Baker is still my #1 Doctor. In spite of referencing Silver Nemesis, I haven’t seen much of Sylvester McCoy’s tenure & what I have seen was pretty cheesy. Until the 50th anniversary retrospective, I hadn’t seen any Hartnell, Troughton or Pertwee episodes, so my favorite BG Doctors are T.Baker>C. Baker>P. Davison. The first story I remember seeing was The Seeds of Doom , with the Krynoids. My favorite villain was (and still is) Davros. My favorite companion was Leela (as a young boy, how could it have been anyone else?), but now I’d say it’s a Sarah Jane, with K-9 close behind.

    Of the AG Doctors, I’m probably among a minority in that Chris Eccleston was my favorite, followed by David Tennant, then Matt Smith. My favorite AG companion was Rose –  I didn’t like her at first, but she grew on me (as did post-resurrection Rory). I was also a fan of River Song, but I’m not sure she really counts as a companion, since she didn’t really travel with him (in-show, anyways). For top AG villain, it’s a toss-up between the Silence and the Angels.

    #13144
    Anonymous @

    @MadScientist72 – you are treading some interesting ground advocating for Colin Baker as a favourite Doctor.  🙂  I have no oar in that river myself, but we have some truly excellent bloggers on this site full of information about Doctors I haven’t seen.  Admittedly, many of them are willing to say that it’s not all Colin Baker’s fault, and that there were many issues at play at the BBC during his time period which seemed to converge on disaster for his characterisation of the Doctor, and for the programme as a whole.  It’s actually rather refreshing to hear someone champion his reign!

    If you’re new to this site, please let me point you toward the blogs (in the sidebar to the right, under the Recent Forum Posts list; or, via the ‘Blog’ tab in the page header).  There are many happy hours of reading to be found there, and also in the regular forum topics as found on the home page (as presumedly you found this thread).

    And, of course, please do continue contributing.  Anyone who likes Rose, River Song, and the Angels will always have me reading more.

    #13149
    OsakaHatter @osakahatter

    @MadScientist72 – welcome!  And some lovely theories to start with.  We had a bit of a debate over on the Name of the Doctor thread about whether the terms of the prophecy have been fulfilled yet and what it means for the Silence. As you say, it could be taken that they had no issue with the question being asked, just it being answered.  So Silence falling isn’t an issue to them, it’s what happens subsequently.  I think they may yet have a role to play.

    Also, as @Shazzbot says, I’m glad to see you advocating Colin Baker – June failed to produce any real supporters on the Faces of the Doctor thread, so an alternative view would be good reading – I’d be interested to know why you rate him.

    Personally, one of my earliest Doctor Who memories is PD transforming into CB but almost immediately I didn’t enjoy the show anymore.  I was too young to know about the background shenanigans, production problems etc, all I knew was that I felt ‘safe’ with PD around, whereas I didn’t want the new Doctor onscreen.  The costume and attitude just made me think he was someone I’d cross the street to avoid.

    McCoy brought me back home to the tv show, while I’d also gotten buried in the novelizations and then subsequently the reruns of earlier Doctors.  But seeing Colin Baker’s Doctor always reminds me of that detachment from the show I had, so I’ve never been able to bring myself to reassess the period – please feel free to try and convince me otherwise!

    Anyway, look forward to seeing any more theories you may have… the more bonkers, the better 🙂

    #13216
    Anonymous @

    Carrying on from @htpbdet ‘s comment 13212 and mine and @thommck ‘s theorising over on The Next Doctor thread, I thought since we are discussing the 50th we should move the conversation over here. (call me a deranged categoralist if you will 🙂 [as I’m sure you will!]).

    HTPBDET, the story of why the Doctor ran away from Gallifrey is one of those mysteries that I wonder if it’s really that good for the show to address, now, at this time.  The missing years of the Time War and the unexplained regeneration betwixt 8 and 9 seem to me to be more pertinent for what the 50th anniversary show is about – namely (and besides satiating us uber-fans) which is drawing in new viewers for the perceived ‘new era of Who’.

    There is time enough in future series to go back to that essential mystery of the Doctor and Susan and the running-away.  No magician shows all his cards at once, and some mysteries should be, perhaps, left as mysteries for as long as they can.  Also, we saw Clara with Hartnell in TNotD which might be enough of a touchstone to the beginning as is necessary for now.

    Although that having been said, the 50th show could perhaps address both the Time War and the ‘genesis of the Doctor’ if you will.  But I still don’t think the Hurt Doctor can be the ‘genesis’, and that is because of all the people here who have pointed out the verbal past tenses used by 11 when describing what Hurt was (not: ‘will be’) in TNotD.

    #13218
    Anonymous @

    @htpbdet – again re your comment 13212

    we know from Smith’s first season that he can rework things if he chooses – that first season was first envisaged as Tennant’s final with him starting it with the crash that would see the commencment of his regeneration

    Are you saying that The Eleventh Hour was supposed to have been a Tennant episode?

    #13219
    Anonymous @

    OK, my comment 13216 makes no sense. The Hurt Doctor could be ‘the genesis’ but he couldn’t, I don’t think, be a Valeyard or any other version of a future Doctor.

    What I meant to say, was, that if the Hurt Doctor is indeed the conduit between 8 and 9, then he couldn’t also be some pre-Hartnell revelation. That would be too screwily timey-wimey for a coherent story.

    #13220
    HTPBDET @htpbdet

    @Shazzbot

    As I understand it, yes, Eleventh Hour and the season that follows, Moffat’s first, was originally envisaged for Tennant.

    These are the words in Name of the Doctor:

    DOCTOR: He is my secret.
    NOT DOCTOR: What I did, I did without choice.
    DOCTOR: I know.
    NOT DOCTOR: In the name of peace and sanity.
    DOCTOR: But not in the name of the Doctor.

    Now, with the greatest of respect to those who dwell on the tense, actually the Doctor does not use any tense – Hurt does.

    Smith has entered his own timestream and there is no reason to think that having entered it he has not seen his future. His remarks to Hurt could work perfectly well whether the events had happened or were to happen.

    I am not saying that Hurt must be a future Doctor; far from it. But I don’t think that possibility can be easily discounted.

    I still think that telling the story of the Time War is too big a deal for a 90 minute special – I am not sure that telling the story of why the Doctor rejected Time Lord society is such a big deal.  But….Moffat may well see it differently.

    To me, it would be joyous and thrilling to sit with my nephews and see a story about why it all began in the first place – a reaffirmation of everything that has happened – and a launch pad for a future. Unsealing the Time War does not seem to me to open up possibilities – merely to ensure that Fans are happy and that Continuity/Canon reigns.

    I can’t see that being what Moffat wants to do.

    But I am probably wrong!

    🙂

    #13221
    Anonymous @

    @htpbdet – I’m luxuriating in the leisurely story-telling pace of ‘The Talons of Weng-Chiang’ through the weekly instalments here on this site.  I’ve commented much about how it is lovely to see characterisation that isn’t truncated into a single glance / line of dialogue.

    But at the same time, I’ve also said that I still can’t believe The Eleventh Hour was a single 45-minute episode – there is so much that happens in there.  And it seems that those same facial expressions / single lines of dialogue don’t leave me feeling that I didn’t really get to know any ancillary characters, nor indeed, any of the main characters (at least for what is necessary to understand and enjoy the story).

    So, I think the Time War could indeed be amply described and experienced in a 90-minute episode.

    Although, having read this line of yours:

    To me, it would be joyous and thrilling to sit with my nephews and see a story about why it all began in the first place – a reaffirmation of everything that has happened – and a launch pad for a future.

    I realise that you are right, and this fits more with what we’ve read about The Moff wanting to wrap up past and future into one neat package.  Darnit, you’re changing my mind about what the 50th has in store for us!  😀

    But … does that mean the Hurt Doctor is [also] pre-Hartnell?  Or are you thinking he’s still a 8->9 version, and some surprise casting will happen to give us that running-away version of the Doctor?

     

    #13222
    HTPBDET @htpbdet

    @Shazzbot

    I don’t think it matters what I think.

    But, essentially, I suspect that there are different views at play. Some old BG timers like me, will want a 50th that answers the original questions, possibly meaning Hurt is Doctor Zero.

    But for AG timers and, indeed, latter BG timers, the thirst for the Time War seems greater.

    For me, personally, I don’t want to know anything about the detail of the Time War. I prefer to have my own dreams about that.

    To launch the series into the next fifty years, what would be best? An effective restart? Or a return to the mystery that started the travels in the first place?

    But I am but one…

    The 50th poses a unique moment in the history of the series. It should celebrate the past and lead unquestionably to the future. I don’t see the re-visitation of the Time War achieving that.

     

     

     

    #13223
    Anonymous @

    @htpbdet

    I don’t think it matters what I think.

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!

    Of course your thoughts matter!  You’ve been with the show since the beginning and as such, have a better and more well-rounded view of it than anyone (including The Moff and any other part of the current production team).  You do make a pertinent point that people who came into the programme at different points in time have different expectations and desires of what the 50th will cover.

    The 50th poses a unique moment in the history of the series. It should celebrate the past and lead unquestionably to the future. I don’t see the re-visitation of the Time War achieving that.

    … And here’s where our conversations tonight are changing my POV on the 50th.  ‘The past’ for certain fans is the Time War, and the resolution of the mystery of what the heck happened in that period is what that section of fandom craves.  ‘The past’ for other fans is the resolution of why the Doctor and his granddaughter left Gallifrey so abruptly, stealing a Tardis (or, a Tardis stealing her Doctor?) and running away and ending up in present-day London.

    I’m too old to want time to move quickly (it moves quickly enough, thank-you-very-much!) but boy, I really look forward to November.

     

    #13226
    HTPBDET @htpbdet

    @Shazzbot

    Bless you – but, truly, my own point of view is just that – my own point of view. It comes because of a life lived near the TARDIS one way or another, as I have elsewhere tried to explain.

    But the true cleverness of Doctor Who (which is part Verity Lambert and part Donald Newman and part Innes Lloyd ) is that it can be anything, anytime, and anywhere and with anyone: it can completely re-invent itself without that being anything other than right.

    Me or someone else might not like it – but that doesn’t matter. It has endless possibilities.

    The 50th gives Moffat a chance no one has had since Tenth Planet – he can be completely surprising if he wants to be. He can make a new audience feel the way the Tenth Planet audience felt…or he can tell a story about the Time War…or he can do something else.

    Its up to him.

    #13227
    Anonymous @

    @htpbdet – I’m not as au fait with all the original names as you are – yes, I know Verity Lambert but D Newman and I Lloyd swooshed over my head.

    That having been said, and correct me if I’m wrong (as I so often am), but Doctor Who was never conceived to be what it has turned out to be: the ultimate in re-invention story-telling.  That first regeneration was startlingly good as a concept – and thrust upon the programme-makers by the vagaries of casting – but it was never part of the originally-visioned DNA of the show.

    Yet, that original casting problem led to the greatest-ever idea for a long-running TV show.  As you say, ‘It has endless possibilities.’ And it is those possibilities that give us, the fans, so much joy.  The constant re-invention of the lead character, the companion(s), the dilemmas; whilst still within that structure allowing the return of previous characters (baddies or companions or eras or planets) and still allowing continual growth of the main character.

    PS: I’m glad that Your Jennifer – or your nephews – have arranged this long-time access to the internet tonight for you.

    #13230
    HTPBDET @htpbdet

    @Shazzbot

    Newman came up with the idea, Lambert made it happen (and fought Newman about monsters/Daleks) and Lloyd presided over the first regeneration.

    Newman and Lambert wanted the format to be as flexible as infinity; Lloyd simply gave that original concept a unique and never bettered push.

    But yes, it did not start out with a Babylon 5 or Buffy roadmap. It grew organically.

    And you are perceptive…Nurse Jenny is back which is bad for her, but good for me. 🙂

    #13231
    Anonymous @

    @htpbdet – all hail Nurse Jenny!  🙂

    With respect to ‘roadmaps’, in context of what Doctor Who has evolved into over 50 years, isn’t that a fantastic argument against roadmaps?  What I know of ‘Lost’ is through superficial and occasional reading of episode blogs.  From that, it appears that the programme-makers were making it up as they went along to the detriment of any coherence of thought and plot over the longterm.  I can’t say for ‘Buffy’ or ‘Babylon 5’ but I imagine the same dynamics were at work: [voice of some ill-fitting-but-expensively-suited-bod in the initial pilot reading] ‘Show me the synopsis of episode 5 of series 7!’

    The more I learn of Doctor Who, the more I am impressed by how it has subverted the entire idea of long-term television programming.  ‘We no need no stinkin’ roadmap!’  That flexibility has allowed it to outlast every other ‘concept’ programme, ever.  Sure, there have been plenty of  show-runners and script editors along the way with their own visions – and these people are regularly replaced 👿 .  Replaced by yet other people whose roadmaps – such as they are – blow raspberries at the roadmaps of their predecessors.

    #13232
    Anonymous @

    erm … to ‘esplain’ further, ‘Lost’ was in a category of TV show which had an assumed fixed ending (as necessitated by American TV production standards) and therefore had to have an envisioned denouement (and plot structures for 7 series in advance of the pilot being commissioned).  So, the lack of anyone adhering to a roadmap throughout that show – most probably due to the increasing fantasies of the swivel-eyed lunatics writing the progamme who believed their own online-led megalomania – led it wildly off-piste and it ended up in a spaghetti-stranded mess of unrelated and confusing plotlines.

    Whereas Doctor Who is (now, thankfully!) envisioned as an open-ended show; so a lack of any kind of roadmap is to be encouraged, nay, celebrated.  Individual series (or cross-series) arcs need a bit of closure, to be sure; but that isn’t at all the same as devising a clear-cut ‘ending’.  The lack of a required ‘denouement’ allows our favourite programme to be continually re-invented along whatever lines the current production team (show-runner, script editor, whatever y’all are calling yourselves nowadays) want to run.

    Oh, and ‘Lost’ was ultimately pants.  Which now, no-one will ever say of Doctor Who.

    #13233
    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    To launch the series into the next fifty years, what would be best? An effective restart? Or a return to the mystery that started the travels in the first place?

    @htpbdet Both.

    It would be possible to re-visit the Time War, the mystery that started the Hartnell Doctor’s travels, and do an effective restart. Providing Moffat has found some way of connecting all three.

    And we already know that Moffat’s found a way of connecting all three. He’s sent the Doctor into his own time-line; the one that travels from Gallifrey to Trenzalore. Does the start of that mystery on Gallifrey lead to the Hurt Doctor’s actions in the Time War? Was it the actions of the Hurt Doctor that led to there being no Doctors beyond Eleven in the time line?

    I’d point out, if you want me to dwell on tenses, that you are omitting lines. (Though in fairness, I probably have better access to the recording of Name of the Doctor right now.)

    Doctor: The name you choose, it’s like a promise you make. He’s the one who broke the promise.

    The emphasis is mine: the tense changes. From referring to himself in the present, the Doctor changes tense to refer to something in the past. The Hurt Doctor isn’t the one who breaks the promise, or will break the promise. He’s the one who broke it.

    Good to see you back. 🙂

    #13234
    Anonymous @

    @bluesqueakpip – thank you for finding what I only remembered!  Yes, of course, the past tense arises in ‘He’s the one who broke the promise.’

    I am the one who posited that River in TNotD was entirely corporeal (based on the spoilers / stills) and got shot down utterly by what actually transpired in that episode.  But, like you, I do think that 11’s choice of verb tense is important with respect to the Hurt Doctor.

    #13235
    HTPBDET @htpbdet

    @bluesqueakpip

    Cheers!

    Yes, but you can break a promise in the future. Timey-wimey, you know.

    Sorry – I was wrong to omit that line and deal with it. So, thanks.

    If you walk into your timeline and discover your future and your past, I expect, because I would, you would look at your future. You know your past.

    You are with a girl who has seen your past. She has not seen Mr X. But she has seen your past.

    You have seen your future but you don’t want to explain. Because its your future and you need to get her out of there pronto.

    So you say “He’s the one who broke the promise”.

    Does not mean in the past.

    “Run you clever boy and remember” is quite different from “Run you clever boy and remember me”.

    “He’s the one who broke the promise” and “He’s the one who broke the promise in my future” – quite different again.

    I am not wedded to any view – all I am saying is that nothing can be properly deduced from the little information we have now.

    In fact, I would rather he was Doctor Zero and had broken the promise in the past.

    🙂

    #13236
    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    @htpbdet – one of the problems with him being Doctor Zero is that the Master would have known Doctor Zero. It is also very likely that the Master would know why Doctor Zero ‘broke the promise’.

    Now, this is a wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey thing, in that the Master can’t know, because Moffat wouldn’t have written it yet. 🙂 But we’re still looking at a situation where there is indeed one period of the Doctor’s life that the Master canonically doesn’t know anything about. He doesn’t know about the later stages of the Time War. He had no idea that the Time Lords were gone, and he had no idea they were now madder than he was.

    And if the Hurt Doctor ‘broke the promise’ during that period, then the Master would not know about it, and there is no problem about his never referring to it.

    I admit that Hurt Doctor might be a future Doctor who came back into his own timeline and did something the Smith Doctor knows about (so that he refers to ‘broke the promise’ in the past tense, because a previous incarnation saw what his future self will do). But we’ve been here before. So long as we don’t get Colin Baker back, all is well. But the two important points to me are:

    1. The Smith Doctor seems to know exactly who the Hurt Doctor is. Yet, in The Next Doctor, the Tennant Doctor appears initially uncertain whether Jackson Lake might be a future self. The implication is that the Doctor doesn’t know the appearance of his future selves until he meets them.

    2. The tenses change within the line. That’s only natural if you are changing your thoughts from your present (keep the promise) to your past (broke the promise).

     

    #13260
    HTPBDET @htpbdet

    @bluesqueakpip

    It may be my befuddled-by-painkillers mind, but you have lost me.

    Why do you think the Master must know everything the Doctor has ever done?

    Does the Master know what happened on Peladon? Does he know about any incursion by the Great Intelligence? Does he know about Marinus, Adric’s fate or Dragonfire?

    Is there something I have missed that makes you think the Master knows everything the Doctor has ever done? Why is there a problem with the Master never having referred to Hurt or his actions? You have me intrigued.

    My nephews have a theory: Hurt is the one who traps Omega in the Point of Singularity choosing to save himself rather than help Omega. He is disgraced and regenerates into a baby ( as River said she did once ) and that baby grows up to be Hartnell who rejects the society built on the trapping of Omega and the resultant power given to Gallifrey and runs away. I have pointed out that it doesn’t really fit with what Pertwee says about Omega in Three Doctors, but they counter that perhaps there is a mind-block the Doctor has inserted in his own mind, to make him forget his origin, a mind-block broken when he enters his own timestream to rescue Clara.

    As to your two points:

    1.   Perhaps. Tennant always struck me as playing it as “What have we got here?” rather than “Hang on, are you me?” He was dealing with someone who said he was the Doctor and he was trying to work out why – well, that is how it seemed to me.

    2. True enough. But it works equally well if you are talking about the future.

    I just don’t think there is any way to be sure of what Moffat intends – but you may well be spot on.

    #13269
    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    Why do you think the Master must know everything the Doctor has ever done?

    @htpbdet – I didn’t think I’d said that. I was thinking that, if there is a Doctor Zero, he must be pre-Hartnell. The Master and the Doctor were on Gallifrey together throughout their joint schooldays – if there were a Doctor Zero, the Master would know.

    Though your nephews have got the one possibility where people might not know; regeneration as a baby and subsequent adoption. The Master might not know his former friend was adopted.

    As to the Time War – it is a period where we have it on tape, so to speak, that the Master definitely didn’t know anything beyond what he was told by David Tennant’s Doctor. And we’re talking about periods where we can shoehorn in an extra incarnation of the Doctor.

    Incidentally, ‘he’s the one who broke the promise’ does NOT work equally well with the future. I’m sorry, but English has a perfectly good tense for that: ‘he’s the one who’ll break the promise.’ And when does the Smith Doctor have time in his timeline to go finding out about his future self? He’s busy doing voice-overs and chucking leaves about and calling Clara to him. 🙂

    Ah, hospital pain-killers. When I went in for my somewhat-in-a-hurry operation, I remember explaining that the last time I’d gone under general anaesthetic (as a child), I’d thrown up over three different kidney bowls and (I think) about half the bed. Oh, ho, they said, anaesthetics have moved on since then.

    My next memory was woozily coming round outside the operating theatre, throwing up, and hearing the words ‘I’m sorry, we’ve tried everything we’ve got’ (which really wasn’t the sort of thing you want to hear in those circumstances). Then I slipped off to sleep again. Then I woke up again (and threw up), and tried to go back to sleep again – only there was this really irritating nurse who kept insisting that I breathe…

    I found out later that I’d had an allergic reaction to the anaesthetic which had been complicated by the painkillers. What should have been a perfectly normal dose had become an overdose, and I’d stopped breathing. What I remembered was the part where I’d started breathing on my own again – but only when conscious.

    Funnily enough, the ward nurse couldn’t understand why, for the rest of my stay, I didn’t want the full dose of painkillers…

    Take care, don’t worry about being woozy, and look after yourself. 😉

    #13329
    Noodles @noodles

    Some interesting thoughts in this thread about who will replace Matt Smith…I haven’t read all the comments, 7 pages makes me lazy! Honestly, I’d rather see the name ‘Doctor’ be an honorary or hereditary title, and Susan takes it on. A plot where she somehow escaped the Time Lock / Time War (remember, she was left on Earth with David in the 1960’s) and the TARDIS finds her and the story carries on.

    Carole Ann Ford takes the part of Susan for a few episodes being called ‘Grandmother’ by her family before regenerating…now you have a female Doctor. It’d be a nice call back to the classic series…and since we can all assume ‘Susan’ is her first regeneration, it opens up the series for 11 more. Who is the regenerated Susan? Jenna-Louise Coleman…Clara Oswald.

    I know most of the previous posts deal with ‘facts’ found on the i-net, or news stories…but as a fan, this is what I would prefer to see than some deus ex machina pulled out of the arse of Stephen Moffat. It just seems the modern series strays further and further away from the classic…it’s time to pull Nu-Who back to the original.

    N~dles

     

    #13330
    Nick @nick

    @bluesqueakpip @htpbdet @Shazzbot (and others before)

    Thank you for an interesting discussion on what Mr Moffat may have choosen to do in the 50th (and Christmas ?) episode(s). One thought that crossed my mind while reading it, is that while we didn’t see who follows Matt Smith as the 12th (or is it 13th ?) Doctor in his timeline in the last episode, now Matt Smith has announced his departure, the production team are completely free to show the Doctor after Matt Smith (without showing the regeneration itself) as well as including John Hurt’s (he could be the 9th, 12th, Zero or a new actor 13th as a matter of fact). [apologies if someone has pointed this out already. I haven’t read it here or anywhere else]. The possibilities he (or they) have potentially created by having the Doctor enter his own timeline at the same time as we know the lead actor will change are really quite extraordinary.

    Illustrating my point, just a little:

    • It seems to me that we can be “sure” that Matt Smith is the 11th Doctor but he may well be the 12th incarnation
    • John Hurt seems to fit in somewhere in the past rather than future because 11 seems to know who he is and what he did. I think he fits in better as the “TimeWar” Doctor (between Paul McGann’s 8 and Chris Eccleston’s 10) [but that’s a matter of opinion and preference right now. You can equally speculate whether JH 9 started and/or finished the Timewar if you like or did something completely different indeed]
    • John Hurt really is zero. It makes sense to me that William Hartnell chose to become the Doctor and leave Gallifrey for a reason. Why does he leave ? John Hurt zero made a decision(s) or lived his incarnation in a way that his subsequent selves repudiated. [Personally I choose to disbelieve this option. Looking at the William Hartnell stories with hindsight I’d say that the Doctor chooses his name sometime before he becomes the Doctor we know as he switches from the explorer in time and space we initially meet to the Doctor we know with Ian and Barbera’s influence and help].
    • John Hurt is really 12. You can argue that once 11 enters his own time stream he becomes fully aware of what happens to him in the future. John Hurt can easily be 12 (and Michael Jayston remains 13). JH isn’t a “Doctor” because of some choice he makes perhaps to avoid becoming the Valeyard (thus creating a different 13 or perhaps even creating the Valeyard 13 by mistake). [the only real evidence that this isn’t the case on screen is the past tense Matt uses, but then is that definitive really ?]

    with a little imagination, I’m sure there are many other possibilities and variations as well.

    Since we also believe that SM intends to take the opportunity to reset the regeneration clock back to One (ie new Zero Doctor) – although we should remember he isn’t/wasn’t forced to do this – you could speculate that whatever causes this to happen [and I think there will be a cause or reason] actively results in the 13th Doctor we expect (the Valeyard if you like) not to happen at all. In fact if he has changed things to create Matt Smith as the 12th incarnation don’t you have to somehow “sacrifice” Doctor 13 to reset the regeneration sequence ? [or is Michael Jayston or another actor playing 13 going to appear in a cameo role after all ?]. If the next Doctor is in indeed the new zero and SM doesn’t sacrifice showing 13 somehow shouldn’t you end up with two regenerations in this story even if they end up being only one in practice ? [ie Matt Smith 12 into 13 and the 12/13 reset into new 0 (probably simultaneously eliminating the Valeyard 13 from existing at all ? This seems to work better than Matt Smith 11 into John Hurt 12 and then JH12 into 13 followed by 12/13 into new 0 somehow. That’s why I don’t generally speculate on what happens next. It gives me a headache].

    Of course I don’t expect anything like this level of complexity to happen (its far too difficult to do properly in one or two TV episodes, although in a book…). I expect whatever happens to be simpler and at the same time to be a surprise. They’ve had long enough to think about it and to build the threads into series 7 (if not 6) after all even without the extra complexity (and opportunity) that Matt Smith leaving has created.

    Chapeau to Mr Moffat et al for sewing enough seeds of doubt and confusion that we can’t truly speculate what exactly is going to happen next.

    He may not have quite planned it this way originally when he came up with his concept for the anniversary, but I’m sure the production team and Matt Smith would have talked about Matt’s intention to leave in early 2013 at the latest. This would have given him enough time to tweak the last story to fit his concept without compromising any hints he’d already dropped into the story arc’s he created along the way as well as the 50th anniversary story for this change (Even better on that front if he had a higher level concept to link everything we’d seen over the last few years together surely ?)

    Having totally confused myself, I’ll step back into lurking on this thread.

    Nick

    #13361
    Anonymous @

    @OsakaHatter

    all I knew was that I felt ‘safe’ with PD around, whereas I didn’t want the new Doctor onscreen

    That’s a big part of what I liked about CB – he wasn’t ‘safe’. He was unpredictable and angrier/edgier than most of the other Doctors and he kept you on your toes because you never knew what he was going to do.  It’s the same reason I liked CE so much among the AG Doctors – the anger & PTSD made him more exciting to watch.

    I wish I could go into more detail about my BG Doctor preferences, but I haven’t been able to watch the episodes recently – they stopped airing them here (in the US*) about 20 years ago and I left Netflix when they started wanting customers to pay for 2 memberships if they wanted DVDs and streaming – so my memory’s gotten more than a little fuzzy.

    *Geography is also why my experience with Doctors 1-3 & 7 is so limited. Over here we got a few JP episodes, but it was mostly TB, PD & CB – and those were all in syndication, about 10 years after the UK saw them. At least we’ve got BBC America now & can see the AG episodes a mere few months after they air in the UK.

    #13364
    Anonymous @

    @htpbdet

    Smith has entered his own timestream and there is no reason to think that having entered it he has not seen his future.

    While it’s entirely possible that he could have seen into his own future, it’s unlikely that – given a choice – he would have. As evidenced in The Angels Take Manhattan, the Doctor is very resistant to doing anything that would force him into a fixed point in time – completely understandable, after the whole Lake Silencio incident.

    I still think that telling the story of the Time War is too big a deal for a 90 minute special – I am not sure that telling the story of why the Doctor rejected Time Lord society is such a big deal.

    I agree that the Time War would be too much to tackle in a 90-minute special, but it could make a good launching point for a spin-off or miniseries, or the Moff could be planning to use it as a theme for all the episodes between the 50th & Xmas.

    The Doctor didn’t actually reject Time Lord society, he just ran away from Gallifrey for a while. He was even elected Lord President of the High Council of Time Lords twice (TB & PD – although PD never actually assumed the office).

    #13366
    Nick @nick

    @MadScientist72

    The Doctor didn’t actually reject Time Lord society, he just ran away from Gallifrey for a while. He was even elected Lord President of the High Council of Time Lords twice (TB & PD – although PD never actually assumed the office).

    Hi there. It’s a bit more complicated than that I’m afraid.

    The Time Lords arrested the second Doctor and sentenced him to Earth for a period of time with a forced regeneration (becoming the third Doctor) during which he ran several “errands” for them. The third Doctor was eventually pardoned and given back his freedom to roan in Space/Time as a reward by the Time Lords for services rendered.

    The Two Doctors story line (during the sixth Doctor’s regeneration) which featured the second Doctor can be interpreted as the Doctor running another errand for the Time Lords in the gap between being arrested and sentenced to Earth as well. The fourth Doctor was also hijacked by the Time Lords and put onto Skaro at the time the Daleks were created to do their bidding as well (if he wanted to). A couple of other fourth Doctor stories inferred he might been steered by the Time Lords as well. [Robert Holmes – at least in the Target books, referred to the Time Lord body that did this as the CIA – Celestial Intervention Agency]

    The fourth Doctor ended up becoming President first when he was the only candidate to survive in the Deadly Assassin (the favourite for the job was unmasked as a crook working with the Master). I vaguely recall that this appointment was later renewed when the Fourth Doctor sorted out the Sontaran invasion of Gallifrey. The Fifth Doctor was later asked to be president as well (which you know).

    The point is, he never wanted the post, never took up the appointment and never returned to Gallifrey except to sort out a crisis after he left, even if the Time Lords did forgive/forget whatever happened in the first place, which caused him to steal the Tardis and leave with Susan.

    the Moff could be planning to use it as a theme for all the episodes between the 50th & Xmas

    There are no planned episodes between the 50th and Christmas special I’m afraid and I very much doubt the theme will carry on in new series 8 in 2014.

    Sorry for being a bore !

    Cheers

    Nick

    #13367
    Anonymous @

    @Noodles

    Susan returning to take over the mantle of the Doctor would be interesting, but I think it would be unlikely.  If Moff’s going to “pass the torch” on the name, rather than have another regeneration, I think he’ll stick with someone from the AG era & go with either the Meta-Crisis half-human David Tennant (dump Matt Smith’s regeneration energy into him, making him more of a River Song-type hybrid) or Jenny, his clone ‘daughter’ of #10.

    However, if he does go the Susan route, the Tardis Data Core has some information that might be a clue – Susan’s real High Gallifreyan name was Arkytior, which means “rose”. That’s from the books, not the TV show, so puritsts would call it non-canonical, but it would be an interesting twist to have Rose be the new Doctor with DT as her companion.

    #13369
    Anonymous @

    @MadScientist72

    it would be an interesting twist to have Rose be the new Doctor with DT as her companion.

    Yes, that would be quite interesting indeed!  Except that it’s been in the press that Jenna Coleman is signed for at least one more series.  So, Rose as the Doctor, with DT and JC both as companions?!  Now that my friend lives up to the subheading of this site: ‘Theories even more insane than what’s actually happening.’  🙂

     

    #13370
    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    @Shazzbot, @MadScientist72 – Of course, Rose being the new Doctor (having regenerated from Susan?) would mean that David Tennant’s 10.5 managed to marry his granddaughter.

    I know Moffat can get a lot past the radar, but I really don’t think he can manage that one – the increasing evidence that Smith’s Doctor fancies Clara was one of the reasons I dropped ‘Clara is Susan/Susan’s daughter’ as one of my bonkers theories.

    #13371
    Anonymous @

    @Nick

    Yeah, I realize that the whole story’s more complicated. I was just trying to point out that he didn’t completely reject the Time Lords, even if he did reject some of their rules – particularly the non-interference policy, which they hypocritically twice put him on trial for violating, even though they periodically used him to violate it without officially getting thei own hands dirty.

    There are no planned episodes between the 50th and Christmas special

    Oh. That’s disappointing. I was hoping they’d have another of their half-seasons in between.

    #13373
    Anonymous @

    @Shazzbot

     So, Rose as the Doctor, with DT and JC both as companions?!

    It wouldn’t be the 1st time the Doctor had more than one companion at a time – Amy & Rory; Rose & Mickey; Romana, K-9 & Adric; Sarah Jane & Harry; an so on. He even started out with 3 – Susan, Barbara & Ian.

    @Bluesqueakpip

    Of course, Rose being the new Doctor (having regenerated from Susan?) would mean that David Tennant’s 10.5 managed to marry his granddaughter.

    That assumes that Susan really was the Doctor’s granddaughter and that wasn’t just their cover-story for the earthlings. Remember what River used to say – “The Doctor lies.”

    #13374
    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    @MadScientist72 – I cheerfully admit that it’s perfectly legal to marry your adopted granddaughter, but if he’s lying (and she’s lying) about Susan being his granddaughter – well, they’ve managed to be remarkably consistent about it for over 50 years of screen time and several centuries of Who time. 😀

    #13396
    Anonymous @

    About past/future tense in MS’s references to DrHurt: Let’s not forget that this is the Doctor we’re talking about here. He’s spent hundreds of years travelling through time & space and he has looked into the Time Vortex/Untempered Schism on more than once occasion, so his speaking about future events in the past tense shouldn’t be surprising.

    About the “minor skirmish” and the Doctor’s death: The GI said that what happened on Trenzalore was minor by the Doctor’s standards but, since the Last Great Time War was only one of the major conflicts in which he was involved, that’s not saying much. Any of humanity’s wars to date wouldn’t even warrant a “minor skirmish” rating by his standards.What we do know, however (assuming the GI spoke truly), is that the Doctor’s final death happens as a direct result of that conflict. So, barring something disrupting what appears to be a fixed point, the Doctor can’t die before that skirmish occurs. Since it hasn’t happened yet – and doesn’t look likely to happen in the 2 specials before MS’s departure (something on that scale would need more build-up than that)- it’s probably pretty safe to say that we will see a regeneration in the Xmas special.

    About the Valeyard: Prior to the GI’s mention of the name, the only source we had for the Valeyard being any form of the Doctor was from the Master’s lips.  Since the Master was the Doctor’s arch-enemy, he can hardly be considered a reliable source. Since the Doctor seemed to be unaware of this alleged link to the Valeyard prior to the master “divulging” it, it’s entirely possible that the Master made it all up. This also brings up the question of how the GI became aware of the Valeyard. Is there some sort of connection between the GI & the Master? Or the GI & the Valeyard himself?

    #13398
    Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip

    @MadScientist72

     and he has looked into the Time Vortex/Untempered Schism on more than once occasion,

    When was that? He’s certainly travelled through the Time Vortex many times, but he’s not noted for looking at it. He has a very low opinion of travelling through the Time Vortex without a capsule. And he claims to have run away instead of looking into the Untempered Schism.

    so his speaking about future events in the past tense shouldn’t be surprising.

    If they happened in his personal past, yes. If they happen in his personal future, well. He’s a time-traveller. Talking about future events in the past tense is rather like those embarrassing moments when you mix up left and right, thus taking a turning going completely in the wrong direction – and having to travel halfway to Dunstable before you can get back onto the one-way system. 🙂

     

    #13409
    Nick @nick

    @MadScientist72

    Interesting thoughts

    About the Valeyard: Prior to the GI’s mention of the name, the only source we had for the Valeyard being any form of the Doctor was from the Master’s lips.  Since the Master was the Doctor’s arch-enemy, he can hardly be considered a reliable source. Since the Doctor seemed to be unaware of this alleged link to the Valeyard prior to the master “divulging” it, it’s entirely possible that the Master made it all up. This also brings up the question of how the GI became aware of the Valeyard. Is there some sort of connection between the GI & the Master? Or the GI & the Valeyard himself?

    That’s not how I remember the Trial of a Time Lord ending. I thought it was clear that the Valeyard was Doctor 13 and his personality was an amalgamation of the dark elements of his previous selves. This certainly wasn’t denied at the time and has gone down in “history” this way. Still I haven’t seen it since it was first broadcast, so I’m sure you could be right.

    I think its possible for Mr Moffat to pretty much do anything he likes, but I would say there is no need for there to be a connection between the GI and the Master or the Valeyard. The GI predates both of these characters  in the show’s history, but of course some sort of alliance is possible. I think a new Master is less likely than anything else, but this could be just the plot twist we might expect to see in an anniversary story (and therefore why we probably won’t). It feels sort of natural to expect the Master to be at the Fall of 11 (who may actually be the 12th incarnation) if only to gloat. It seems more probable that we might see the Valeyard in the anniversary show given the hint dropped by the GI regarding the Doctor’s future, but I’m not sure that is actually necessary.

    I believe (without any specific reason) that the way new Doctor zero comes about (if that happens) must resolve the character issues shown post timewar by Doctor’s 9/10/11 and probably eliminate the future Doctor which becomes known as the Valeyard. A fight between the Valeyard and the previous Doctors’ over his soul and future makes good dramatic sense, but have they chosen to go down that route ?

    I’m looking forward to seeing how they manage to do this and I’ll try not to be disappointed if I don’t like it.

    Cheers

    Nick

    #13412
    Nick @nick

    @MadScientist72

    Yeah, I realize that the whole story’s more complicated. I was just trying to point out that he didn’t completely reject the Time Lords, even if he did reject some of their rules – particularly the non-interference policy, which they hypocritically twice put him on trial for violating, even though they periodically used him to violate it without officially getting their own hands dirty.

    As I tried to indicate, I knew I was being a bit of a bore there. I guess I differ from you on my perception of the Doctor’s character and relationship with the Time Lord society. I think he totally rejected the basis of their society and their attitude to the Universe as a whole. I don’t see the glimmer of acceptance that you do.

    Of course, that doesn’t stop him from

    • recognising that some of the tasks they perform (eg protecting the Universe from certain elements – thinking of those thins whose name I forget from the first new series when Rose meets her dad before he died -, limiting Time Travel etc are necessary for the good of the Universe; and
    • acting to make sure the inherent power that the Time Lords possess(ed) doesn’t fall into the wrong hands, whether they be Time Lord, Dalek, Sontaran or the Master’s.

    Can we really say that there is any form acceptance or at least understanding from the Doctor in what the Time Lords chose to do to their society during the Time War ?

    The “absolute power corrupts absolutely” quotation really does seem to fit best with how the Time Lords have been written in the series.

    In respect of the Doctor himself, I suggest that what Moffat is showing us with Matt Smith’s characterization (and to a degree RTD did with David Tennant as well) is how the Doctor himself copes with power himself. The full phrase (depending on which form the quotation is taken from) is

    “It is not only the slave or serf who is ameliorated in becoming free… the master himself did not gain less in every point of view,… for absolute power corrupts the best natures” or “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men”.

    Interesting ?

    Thanks

    Nick

    #13462
    Anonymous @

    @Bluesqueakpip

    And he claims to have run away instead of looking into the Untempered Schism.

    Actually, what he said was “We stand there, eight years old, staring at the raw power of time and space, just a child. Some would be inspired. Some would run away. And some would go mad.” [emphasis added] The implication is that he did stand and stare, and if he ran, it was what he saw there that made him run.

    He’s certainly travelled through the Time Vortex many times, but he’s not noted for looking at it.

    In The Parting of the Ways, after Rose looks into the Heart of the Tardis, he tells her “You looked into the Time Vortex. Rose, no one’s meant to see that.” Later in the same scene, she says “I can see everything. All that is, all that was, all that ever could be,” to which he replies “That’s what I see, all the time. Doesn’t it drive you mad?”, clearly indicating that he has looked.

    #13472
    Anonymous @

    @Nick

    That’s not how I remember the Trial of a Time Lord ending. I thought it was clear that the Valeyard was Doctor 13 and his personality was an amalgamation of the dark elements of his previous selves.

    Here’s the scene to refresh you memory.

     

    The Doctor’s certainly surprised by the Master’s “revelation”. And according to the Master, the Valeyard himself is the amalgamation, not just his personality. He’s something “between” incarnations, like he was somehow spun off or spit out during the regeneration process.

    I would say there is no need for there to be a connection between the GI and the Master or the Valeyard. The GI predates both of these characters in the show’s history, but of course some sort of alliance is possible.

    I agree that the GI knowing about the Valeyard is by no means proof of a connection between it & him or the Master, but it certainly suggests the possibility. Is this GI the same as the one from the AG series, or just another entity using the same name? There didn’t seem to be any recognition of an old foe when #11 heard the name.

    I think he totally rejected the basis of their society and their attitude to the Universe as a whole. I don’t see the glimmer of acceptance that you do.

    If he had utterly rejected the Time Lords, I don’t think he would have made so many trips back there, or had a Time Lady companion (Romana).

    Can we really say that there is any form acceptance or at least understanding from the Doctor in what the Time Lords chose to do to their society during the Time War ?

    Without more definitive information, I don’t really think we can say much of anything about how the Doctor felt about their society during that that period, except at the very end.

    #13570
    Anonymous @

    MadScientist72  – well, with baby theories, we still need to call in @bluesqueakpip (and I believe @scaryb ?) who have had their own theories on that particular point regarding the next Doctor.

    I myself also noted Stormageddon’s name when it was revealed, but didn’t link that to the ‘Oncoming Storm’ of the description of the Doctor in any serious way.  I just thought it was clever-clever of The Moff, weaving multiple strands into a tapestry of confusing – and potentially misleading – detail.

    Baby theories aside, I still think you’ve hit on a gold mine of potential theorising with the idea that McGann never actually regenerated into Ecclestone, which means we’re left with a single incarnation that suffered – and survived – the horrors of the Time War.

    PS:  I’ve moved my response to the 50th thread because I think Bluey avoids the Next Doctor thread out of frustrated ennui at the protracted and pointless guessing; and, as interesting as your baby theory is to many people, your original theory isn’t really about the next Doctor but is wrapped around what the 50th’s plot could reveal.

Viewing 50 posts - 301 through 350 (of 964 total)

The topic ‘The Day of The Doctor – The 50th Anniversary Special’ is closed to new replies.