Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
10 November 2014 at 19:26 #35276
I am unsettled.
As am I. I had almost precisely the same response to all the things you mention. In fact, I have not been able to even give it a second viewing yet, as a result of my emotional response. It was, as you say, unrelentingly bleak. I can only hope that the story will be resolved in the Christmas special in a way that brings some hope.
But I suppose I should watch it again. I must be strong.
10 November 2014 at 19:13 #35274Not a spoiler as such, but I thought it prudent to post it here:
On the BBC Doctor Who page there is a short video interview with Ingrid Oliver, talking about playing Osgood and her death at the hands of Missy. She ends the interview by saying (something like): “But hey, it’s Doctor Who, so who knows…” and then smiles knowingly.
10 November 2014 at 02:34 #35218Finally got to see it (have not read any comments yet, so apologies if others have covered what I am about to say). Not quite sure precisely what my response is yet, Except to say this:
It was an emotionally troubling viewing experience for me–but I think it was designed that way. Following on from that point, we were led to believe this was a two-part story, but I think this is actually the second part of a three-part story, and that the way the final credits were interrupted with the trailer for the Christmas episode demonstrated that the story will be resolved then.
Now, if an episode including Santa Claus is any clue, then I assume that some of the things that happened in this episode can be changed if we wish hard enough. If so, at the top of my list would be the recovery of Osgood, who would, on the basis of what we saw of her here, make a fabulous companion. And her death was, quite simply, too cruel to let stand.
8 November 2014 at 05:25 #34980On the road at the moment, so a quick message before Death in Heaven. If the Master’s TARDIS is not the nethersphere on the inside and St Paul’s on the outside, then …Blame Blenkinsop!
and I will also nail my colours to the mast with this prediction: the Doctor is right–SEB, the nethersphere, it is all a con.
4 November 2014 at 22:17 #34755maybe Clara is the Doctor and Missy’s daughter
They’ve both called her “Clara, my Clara” if I’m not mistaken.If so, then wouldn’t she have two hearts? Surely somebody at the NHS would have picked that up by now.
4 November 2014 at 17:01 #34741Brilliant! The more outraged they are, the funnier they are.
4 November 2014 at 15:13 #34736Remember the image of the skeletal hand holding the sonic screwdriver in a trailer half-way through series 6?
I have forgotten, but did that image play out in a subsequent episode? (I have a vague memory that it was left unexplained, but I could be wrong.) The reason I ask is whether it might have relevance to next week, in light of what we saw this week. If so, Moffat has been playing a very long game indeed.
3 November 2014 at 23:32 #34690Loved your list of Clara’s post-it notes. I admire your dedication. In fact, I was inspired by your example to have a look myself, and discovered that, not only does she have two notes for Robin Hood, but also two notes for Three Months.
You don’t think that she slipped away with Robin in Sherwood Forest when we weren’t looking, and…
No, perhaps not, but there is something strangely appealing about the idea. One can only imagine her trying to explain it to Danny. Hold on, was that what the phone call was about?
<OK, I’ll stop now.>
3 November 2014 at 16:24 #34646To paraphrase a famous line from one of the worst movies ever made:
“being on this site means never having to say you’re sorry”
btw, where’s the trailer for “Death in Heaven”?
3 November 2014 at 16:05 #34643Boy oh boy…Because of you, I just put the DVD of “The Time of the Doctor” back in and freeze-framed the kitchen. On another screen, I have freeze-framed the kitchen in “Dark Water”. It is exactly the same kitchen! So, yes, it is her flat. In fact, I think the dialogue between Clara and her father about cooking the dinner indicates that her father emailed her instructions, presumably before coming over for dinner.
There are, indeed, some wonderful parks in London, along with some truly crappy council housing estates. But even though we have witnessed Danny’s athletic ability by doing somersaults, I think it would be even beyond Danny’s ability to make it from the Welsh National War Memorial to London in a couple of minutes!
3 November 2014 at 15:24 #34639Thanks for identifying the Welsh National War Memorial in Cathays Park. I was wondering what the monument was. And I agree that we were supposed to assume it was in London and not think too much about it. When I was watching, I was also struck by the fact that Danny is supposedly only a couple of minutes’ walk from Clara’s flat, and he appears to have been hit by a car in central London, and yet Clara’s flat, the last time we saw it from the outside (the previous episode with Gran) seemed to be in a rather desolate spot a long way from central London.
Clearly, Google Maps don’t fit into the Who universe!
3 November 2014 at 01:56 #34603Fantastic! I plan on diving in. Who knows when I will re-surface.
2 November 2014 at 23:42 #34593@purofilion
Aw, shucks! (But in reality, there were many finer minds that arrived at the same conclusion)
@The Beast (aka @glenisterm)
I think we spent most of the episode inside the Master’s TARDIS–the nethersphere on the inside, St Paul’s on the outside.
As for next week (can it be a whole week?) I have no idea what Moffat will pull off. The conclusion (the Doctor will triumph, the Master will escape, and love will save the day) is easy to predict, but the detail of how we get there…
2 November 2014 at 20:48 #34562I’m not sure we will be told how the Master got away last time, or indeed, whether we need to be told.
As @phileasf so wisely said:
Some are wondering how the Master got away from the time bubble in which Rassilon and co are imprisoned. But there’s a long tradition of the Master escaping from certain death with no explanation, and I suspect that tradition will be honoured in this case too. Once we actually saw him get ‘burnt to a crisp’, as the Doctor put it, and when he was later seen to be all right he didn’t explain why, even when it was pointed out that he was last seen being burnt to a crisp. Like the Doctor, he just always gets away.
Moffat rarely bothers to take the time to explain away stuff like that, and probably correctly so–because, at the end of the day, most people are willing to accept it. In fact, sometimes he even makes fun of not explaining what happened (a la, how did Sherlock survive the fall from the hospital?)
2 November 2014 at 18:19 #34550Have just re-watched Michelle Gomez reveal who she is again, I am revising my idea of a couple of posts above. On reflection, a regeneration into a male Master would only have worked if it came at the very end of the next episode and the reveal…omg, the Master!!…came at that point. But now that it has been revealed, there does not seem to be a point to changing the actor. And…Michelle Gomez is just too brilliant!
On another point, Seb is perhaps the most horrible character in the episode. While appearing to be sympathetic to Danny, he is, in reality, playing on Danny’s emotions and using emotional blackmail in the most egregious way to get Danny to do what Seb and the Master wants. I look forward to him getting his comeuppance!
2 November 2014 at 17:34 #34545It is probably a perception filter, just like the one making everyone believe there was a second floor to the house in “The Lodger”.
So, next week the dastardly Master (and I am still holding out hope for the second part of my original prediction–that at the end of that episode, perhaps after a tremendous battle with the Doctor, Missy will be forced to re-generate into…a male actor who will play the Master in series 9–even though I think Michelle Gomez is doing a spiffing job!) and…what was I saying?
Oh yes, so next week the dastardly Master will escape in his/her TARDIS, the perception filter will disengage and St Paul’s will still be there. A good thing too.
2 November 2014 at 16:52 #34541So, if heaven/the nethersphere is not real, then what is it? The Master’s TARDIS, with an outer shell of St Paul’s cathederal.
2 November 2014 at 16:27 #34538Have been reading everyone’s posts (and thanks @scaryb!) and I may have missed someone already noting this, but at the cliffhanger, when Danny’s finger is hovering over the Delete button, we see the reflection of the little boy from Danny’s very bad day appear as a reflection on the iPad. Not sure how that will play out next week (so long to wait!) but it was a lovely and poignant touch.
To go back to my very early thoughts on A Matter of Life and Death after “The Caretaker”, I would repeat one thing I said then about the representation of heaven in the movie–it was all in the mind of the main character. It wasn’t real, and neither is this nethersphere, I suspect.
2 November 2014 at 15:14 #34532OK, now some thoughts on this excellent episode.
A brilliant episode for so many reasons. For one thing, Moffat takes us (and 10 year olds) into some very dark waters indeed, and much of the episode is very uncomfortable and challenging (particularly for those who have recently lost someone close) but by the end Moffat brings us back to Doctor Who (and everything it represents) as the revelation that Missy is the Master reassures us that the Doctor will be triumphant, Danny will be rescued and true love will save the day. (which is also blenkinsop’s prediction for next week.)
2 November 2014 at 15:01 #34531Wow! Missy IS the Master! Blenkinsop triumphant! Hurrah!
Of course, this does ruin my hitherto unbroken record of wrong predictions…
31 October 2014 at 17:30 #34381The Finale…at Halloween! And promising to be suitably creepy!
My final prediction is…my original prediction. Missy as Master. @drben wisely pointed out that Moffat only tends to draw on BG Who if it is pre-JNT. He generally avoids RTD as well. All this narrows it down a bit. No, I stick with Missy as Master. It won’t be River for the simple reason that River has always been, and always will be, on the side of the angels…but not the Weeping Angels!
No, Missy is clearly evil, and, in the clips, almost Roger Delgado-like in mannerisms.
My only adjustment to my prediction is that Clara, who I still believe will turn out to be the Doctor’s daughter (watched “The Caretaker” again last night and it is obvious!), won’t be revealed as such in the finale, but probably in the christmas special (not a dry eye in the house!)
Enjoy the show, and feel for us poor CWCs (colonials without cable) who have to wait for iView tomorrow.
29 October 2014 at 15:45 #34278well, you make sure you come back soon. the place isn’t the same without you.
29 October 2014 at 15:06 #34274Hurrah! You’re back!
(and speaking to us from the stomach of the Tythonian Ambassador–it must be warm in there)
27 October 2014 at 20:52 #34224@craig, @fatmaninabox, @phaseshift
The post above needs to be edited to remove the spoilers that mention the trailer.
27 October 2014 at 19:32 #34221Yes, he did mention 2016. I wondered about that too.
I had another thought about it, but I might post it on the Trailers thread, in case it is a bit spoilery.
27 October 2014 at 19:27 #34219Fantastic!
There are two types of predictions:
1. What will actually happen
2. What would have been even better than Moffat’s solution
Even if you don’t get #1, I see yours as a strong early contender for #2…
27 October 2014 at 14:08 #34201Wasn’t sure where to post this–on Trailers, as it is about next week?–but decided on here, as it is about where the show is going.
OK, since we are about to arrive at the two-part finale and lead into series 9, I think now is the apropriate time for us all to nail our colours to the mast, and state where we think this is all leading.
For my part, I will stick by comments I have made upstream:
* Clara will (somehow) be revealed to be the Doctor’s daughter.
* Missy will be revealed to be the Master (after undergoing a gender change to that effect)Of course, I have an unbroken record of being wrong in every prediction I make at series’ end, but what’s the point of gut feelings if you don’t stick by them?
27 October 2014 at 00:29 #34176Oh, dear, I can see we have very different ideas about relationships.
From where I stand Danny stands for responsibility. He stood for responsibility in this episode, just as he stood for responsibilty in “The Caretaker”, when his first response was to want to evacuate the school. Clara, on the other hand, has been lying to him in a very irresponsible way. But she ultimately recognises the wisdom of what he says to her in this episode. And the children know what they want–to be with their mum. To have taken them on a joy ride into space in the face of that really would have been inexcusable. Does he want to stop her flying? I think not.
No, on every single level, Danny radiated goodness and wisdom.
On this one, I think we are going to have to agree to disagree.
But I would be interested to know what others think.
26 October 2014 at 14:15 #34148Well, I watched it, and this time read through the responses before posting, and am very surprised at the negative reaction by many. I actually quite liked it. For a children-centric story it was, in my humble opinion, miles better than, say, “Nightmare in Silver”.
It wanted to capture a child-like sense of wonder, and it delivered in spades.
I loved the way it played on the Green Man mythology, and in that sense it was very English in the way it tapped into a long tradition of fantasy and lore. It was, now that I think about it, re-capturing a tradition of innocence in fantasy and lore back from the (supposedly) adult iteration in something like “Game of Thrones”, where everything, including fantasy and lore, is expected to be “edgy” and “grounded” (those hateful, hateful words).
Was the episode part of an arc that involves @phileasf‘s brilliant bonkers theory that Clara can make things happen by imagining them? Maybe, but I think the episode can be appreciated by accepting it at face value (ie, without reference to hidden meanings or as part of an arc). This was an episode where love triumphed, where families were re-united, where Danny radiated goodness and wisdom. Have we become so cynical that we can’t accept that?
22 October 2014 at 22:42 #33999@Purofilion
I remember a horrifying creature seen in Adelaide and Brisbane which I saw for the last time about 30 years ago: a moving collection of slug like creatures crawling together and moving at a slow but unnerving pace. The slug creatures, together, were about five feet long and four ft wide (each one was fairly small)
I used to work in an academic department with a faction that just like that…
Which is one of the reasons I have always liked Doctor Who–it is so unlike real life and good always triumphs in the end!
22 October 2014 at 18:07 #33989Here is a shot of the TARDIS from the Hartnell-era story “Marco Polo”
But I don’t think the issue of weight has been explained before (others might remember a specific reference, but I don’t).
21 October 2014 at 17:18 #3395320 October 2014 at 23:06 #33915@blenkinsopthebrave Clara as the Doctor’s daughter – not really convinced, but I love it anyway.
Ah ha! A challenge! OK, I will try and find all the evidence from Clara’s first appearance onwards.
Of course, this may take a little time.
19 October 2014 at 21:46 #33866First impressions–after which I will go back and read everyone’s posts.
Lots of excitement, great monsters, a whiny council employee who was even more annoying than Dr Smith on “Lost in Space” (didn’t you just want to chuck him to the monsters…?), and an episode that reminded me a lot of an episode of “ST: Next Generation” (particularly the way the story revolves around correcting something going wrong with the TARDIS–just as something usually went wrong with either the Holodeck or the Transporter on the Enterprise. Indeed, the TARDIS seems to be just a machine in this one–lacking any life or personality of its own.
I thought they handled Clara’s challenge quite well–particularly at the end, where she realises that being a Doctor is about responsibility and not accolades and fun. In fact, it continues what this series has shown in relation to Clara–that she is being prepared for something bigger than simply being a companion.
At to what that might be…well, I think the jury is still out of that one. It could be preparation for parenthood, it could be that she is being primed as a weapon by Missy (although I don’t see that), or it could be that she has…a destiny. One idea that I have decided to revive is something I felt when she had her first adventures with 11–that she is the Doctor’s daughter. The way that 12 interacted with her (and she with him) in “Listen” and in this episode would fit with that, I think.
As for Missy at the end of the episode–if she chose Clara, then was she the woman in the shop? And would that fit with my idea about Clara being the Doctor’s daughter? Hmm, maybe not. But on the other hand…
More thought required. Fortunately, twilight is approaching. Perhaps a Shiraz is called for.
16 October 2014 at 21:15 #33633When I saw that viewing schedule for 23 November 1963 posted by @pedant, I wasn’t just impressed by how culturally influential all those shows were; I also realised, not only that I regularly watched all of them as a wide-eyed youth in the mid-60s, but also, that taken together–(the wonder and educational inspiration of Hartnell’s Who, the surreal humour of The Goons (even the under-appreciated TeleGoons), the satire of That was the Week that was, and even (dare I admit it) the celebration of community and responsibility that was Dixon of Dock Green)–they were all crucial in shaping the youthful (and the aged) Blenkinsop.
On the other hand, of course, a whole generation saw exactly the same shows as I did and turned out far more normal!
As for soap, for me the greatest soap of all was A Family at War. God, I loved that show. Not only was it great soap, in was soap in context–it was the relationship between the social upheavals from the Spanish civil war through to the end of the second world war on the one hand, and the family trials and tribulations on the other, that made it what it was. Or, as we used to say over coffee at the university cafeteria, while pretending no-one before us had ever thought about it–the personal and the political.
16 October 2014 at 04:36 #33611That line-up of television on 23 November 1983 is astonishing.
Not simply “Doctor Who”, but:
“The Telegoons” (Sellars, Secombe, and Milligan)
“Dixon of Dock Green (Jack Warner)
“Comedy Playhouse” (with a script by Jack Rosenthal)
“That was the Week that was” (David Frost, et al)The cultural impact of all of that is amazing. And all of that on one night.
And then you look at the average night of television today… Or am I being too harsh on the average night of television today? Personally, I think not.
13 October 2014 at 02:02 #33476OK, just watched it again, and I am less convinced about the ongoing importance of Perkins, the engineer.
Damn! I am so looking for a bonkers theory, but just cannot come up with one.
All I can hang on to is the mystery of Danny. Good? (probably) Bad? (perhaps) An Auton? (unlikely)
Probably time for bed.
13 October 2014 at 00:37 #33471Great idea about “the engineer”. I was thinking this was a stand-alone episode, without any “arc” implications; but it is true that the engineer was slightly strange–even unnerving, from his first appearance to his last. And, as you say, he gave the impression of knowing more than he let on.
Hmm. More thought required (with the assistance of another glass of wine, of course).
12 October 2014 at 16:48 #33444Well, that was an enjoyable romp! First impressions only, and I have not had a chance to read through all the previous comments, so apologies if I say something already said.
I open with my mea culpa–the Doctor does lie.
In some senses, the episode reminded me of “The God Complex”–the monster who isn’t really a monster, the victims whose demise is a reflection of their own frailties, the orchestration of the events (GUS, on the one hand, and the security camera point-of-view, on the other hand), the confined setting (hotel, train) in which they are trapped.
If I saw the episode as building on established themes in this series, they were the Doctor being forced to re-evaluate his prejudice about soldiers (as the Mummy was not simply a soldier, but as much a victim as the rest of them) and Clara’s ongoing confusion about her attachment to this new iteration of the Doctor.
Do I think this episode was part of a larger story (a la of Lake Silencio proprortions)? As with the previous episode, I suspect not.
Does this mean I am running out of bonkers theories? I hope not, it is just that I have found the last two episodes, which I enjoyed, harder to attach bonkers theories to.
The one character who remains a complete mystery to me is Danny. I am reminded of the scene in “Sherlock” where he is confronted by the naked Irene Adler. Instead of all his impressions appearing on the screen in text, there a simply a series of questions marks. Sherlock cannot read her, and that is my response to Danny. After a number of episodes, I still have no idea of how to interpret him. Now, while that might say a lot about me, I also suspect it says a lot about the ultimate importance of Danny.
8 October 2014 at 16:05 #33275@devilishrobby, @fatmaninabox, @brewski, @Oh, everybody, really…
It might be strange, given my predilection for bonkers theories, to say this, but:
I think we might be reading too much into this episode. Clearly, Clara’s angry confrontation with the Doctor is crucial, but how are we to read that scene? I would argue that the Doctor is not lying, and everything he says to Clara is said without guile or a hidden agenda. In fact, it goes back to a point I made upstream somewhere that unlike 11, this Doctor does not obviously lie.
If you watch that final confrontation again, and focus on Capaldi, I think is is clear that he means what he says. Indeed, if it is revealed that he and the TARDIS were invisible, I tend to think it would cheapen him and what he says to Clara, and I, for one, would be disappointed by such a reveal.
This was an episode that wanted its target audience (10-year olds) to think about moral questions, and it did it in an entertaining way, with a space dragon and the moon as an egg that, from @thommck‘s account of watching it with his 10-year olds, was accepted and enjoyed by its target audience. As it was by those of us who could tap into the 10-year old lurking in us all.
But was it hiding a deeper and complex story (a la, of Lake Silencio proportions)? This time, I suspect not.
And the 10-year old lurking within the ageing Blenkinsop frame is looking forward to an adventure on the Orient Express…in space!
7 October 2014 at 15:03 #33207Is the moon an egg?
Time for the definitive answer:
6 October 2014 at 23:49 #33181It also struck me odd that there’s such a negative response on the Graun. Normally they’re up in arms about deus ex machina (that aren’t really) and everything getting neatly tied up and possibly over-simplistic ways. Now they get a story that doesn’t give them that, that shows the fall-out of tricky moral decisions, that shows heroes changed and compromised by events and they don’t like that either
6 October 2014 at 22:59 #33167The Doctor lies
But does he, as the 12th?
Damn, now I will have to watch all the episodes again, to answer my question.
It’s true that 11 used to lie through his teeth, as we all commented on. But does 12? It might be just a Blenkinsop senior moment, but I am not sure he does.
6 October 2014 at 19:02 #33147Clara’s anger
Perhaps another factor might be that he refuses to save the world when she has saved him–in fact, every previous version of him. And it was her plea to the Time Lords, that led to them giving him a new set of regenerations (according to one theory, anyway). Now, when she needs him, he says no.
But on the other hand, I would feel that more strongly if the Clara in series 8 felt like the Clara in series 7.
But in a funny sort of way, she doesn’t. The Clara that goes back to her flat after work and pours herself a glass of wine, doesn’t seem the Clara of series 7. I’m not sure why. I had always assumed that Clara was aware of her own history at some level. But this Clara doesn’t seem to have a history.
Still thinking this through.
6 October 2014 at 13:46 #331395 October 2014 at 23:47 #33085James-of-the-piscene-variety.
Welcome back, sir.
5 October 2014 at 23:27 #33081Hello @melloyello (without the “w”s–very cool!)
Just when I was thinking of posting a comment that we needed more bonkers theories instead of (albeit well argued) critiques of the episode, along you come with a fabulous bonkers theory!
I suppose I could think of a counter-argument (along the lines that Mels supposedly grew up at the same time as Amy and Rory, and so would be in her 30s by the time this episode is taking place) but your bonkers theory is so great, that I am willing to ignore that!
Could it be…? Or is Courtney a sort of Mels substitute in Moffat’s mind?
But…but…let’s go back to the point that Mels/Courtney should logically be in her 30s if she grew up with Amy and Rory. Well, one one the things that bothered me in the episode was that the Doctor assumed Courtney was 35, then maybe…he was right!
I am liking your theory, @melloyello!
5 October 2014 at 21:48 #33069@Goldmember
BTW, how are you all replying to individual posts? I don’t see a reply with quote option.
Just type @ followed by the name of the person you are responding to (no gaps after the @) and it will come up. The Blockquote option is at the top of the box you are typing into .
Cheers.
5 October 2014 at 20:30 #33060OK, in light of the second viewing, I would single out the final confrontation between Clara and the Doctor as the whole point of the episode. The actual story itself (the threat that is revealed to be a life that deserves compassion and protection) has been done elsewhere by Moffat (the star whale, the teller), but what is different here is Clara.
@whoville made a great reference to the episode having a Childhood’s End kind of vibe, and yes, it does, but I think it is more about Clara moving on from the secure protection of the Overlord/Doctor than it is humanity–after all, humanity was prepared to sacrifice the creature (not that Australia, Asia, or most of the southern hemisphere, got to have an opinion, of course!)
As I read that last confrontation between Clara and the Doctor, he came across (to me, anyway) as in no way condescending or patronising. He really thought he was doing the right thing, and was genuinely surprised by the response he received from Clara. But when we lash out at those we care for, we are more than often angry with ourselves. Clara prides herself on her caring and authoritative nature as the school teacher, but when the Doctor stepped aside to let her decide, instead of saving the day, as usual, she was frightened, and angry with herself because she was frightened. And so, was angry with him.
So, on second viewing I enjoyed the way it ended. And I am looking forward to the way their relationship is going to play out. But (partly for reasons given in my post above after my first viewing), I am totally stumped for bonkers theories!
Except, that is for the Michael Powell connection to the promised land–to which I will ruminate (and not, @thommck, urinate!) on.
5 October 2014 at 17:39 #33054Cockies. Not exactly relevant to this thread, but to answer your question with light and sound, here is a clip. I have lived in a number of locations in Australia, and this can be just what it is like outside your bedroom window (usually on a Sunday morning, when you are trying to sleep in).
-
AuthorPosts
