Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
15 December 2013 at 14:42 #22840
Was looking at the BBC America site, and discovered one photo from the Christmas special that is not on the BBC site. It is of Orla Brady, who I understand is playing the Mother Superior of the Papal Mainframe with…a Dalek stalk sticking out of her head (as in Asylum of the Daleks). but sorry, I do not know how to upload it. @wolfweed, help me out!
15 December 2013 at 14:35 #22839Well, Mrs Blenkinsop and I finally surrounded ourselves with boxes of tissues and watched “An Adventure in Space and Time” last night.
It was magical.
Everything you have all said was true. It was a love letter by Gatiss to both the show, to the people who made it happen and to Hartnell.
David Bradley’s portrayal was superb, and when the credits rolled I was wiping away the tears.
The one thing that I was especially struck by (not sure if it has been remarked on already) was the relationship between Hartnell and the Tardis. When he takes on the role and complains about the non-appearance of the set of the Tardis while they are filming the first episode, you assume it is just his nerves about taking on this new role, but as the show progresses it becomes clear that he is the only one who truly understands how important it is that the Doctor know exactly how the Tardis operates, because it is the type of thing “the kiddies will know”. And by the end of his tenure, he might be forgetting his lines but he is the only one who knows how to turn on the Tardis. I thought that was a lovely touch, and says something about storytelling and when “Doctor Who” works and when it doesn’t–ie, that it works when the people working on it really understand what the show is.
That is one of the reasons why the scene with Matt Smith works so well, particularly when Smith puts his hands on the Tardis’s telepathic circuits. As @pedant (where are you, my old friend? time to return to the fold) points out, if true, it is sheer genius.
And then, the final clip of William Hartnell giving the “one day I shall return” speech at the end, captures (in light of everything that has gone before) the power and legacy of both Hartnell the actor, and “Doctor Who” the show.
Just wonderful.
13 December 2013 at 14:09 #22735If Moffat has said there will be a fair bit of nudity in the Christmas special, and given that we should never take anything he says at face value, I think the nudity will involve a baby.
12 December 2013 at 03:09 #22685we were going to watch AAiTaS tonight, but Mrs Blenkinsop and I decided to get in more boxes of tissues before the experience, so watched somethimg less emotionally challenging–Poirot–instead. Tomorrow.
And thanks for the posts on Canada during my exile.
10 December 2013 at 20:42 #22592No, I made sure I watched “Night of the Doctor” and “The Last Day”, and they were excellent set-ups for the show.
I now have “An Adventure in Space and Time” with me, but I really am waiting for Mrs Blenkinsop to get home before watching that one. As I have said on this board–before I went missing in a pocket universe waiting for the shows to arrive in the blenkinsop letter box–I have been looking forward to “An Adventure in Space and Time” even more than the 50th special. What with Hartnell being my first Doctor, or, more specifically, Hartnell’s Doctor, Ian, Barbara and Susan being the reason I fell in love with the show as an 11 year old. All that means either I will be disappointed that the experience of watching “an Adventure in Space and Time” doesn’t live up to my expectations (unlikely), or, I will have to watch it with a really, really, big box of tissues close to hand (very likely and highly probable).
I will report back on the experience tomorrow.
10 December 2013 at 19:18 #22582Aw, shucks! <blenkinsop goes pink from embarrassment>
Well, I did not manage to escape every spoiler, but enough to be surprised and delighted when I watched it.
Will wait for Mrs Blenkinsop to come home from work to watch it again….Oh, well…maybe not.
10 December 2013 at 18:50 #22579Finally, I get to see it in the wilds of frozen Canada. Have been avoiding the site until I actually watched it (and that has been difficult!) So, all the bonkers theorising I came up with here over the previous weeks and months, none of it was right! Hurrah! Why? Because what Moffat offered us was better!
It was simply fantastic! It was a love letter to the show, it was a love letter to the fans (well, it certainly connected with this one), and it was a brilliant way of setting up the show for the future. In fact, everything he promised. (One of the few times Moffat was not lying!)
So much to say about it, but I really need to read through the hundreds of comments above (and so many new people on the forum! Hi!) before I do.
I will say one thing before I go off and set the blenkinsop brain to work. And it is about the way he used the device of familiar faces and duplicates. There was the face of Rose (but who wasn’t Rose), there was the face of Tom Baker (who may or may not have been the Doctor or simply the Curator) there was the Queen and Kate Lethbridge-Stewart and Osgood (who may or may not have been themselves–or Zygons), and of course, there was Hurt and Tennant and Smith who were simultaneously themselves and each other. In fact, practically everyone was playing versions of themselves. This is why I think incorporating the Zygons was such a stroke of genius, as it allowed for that play on people playing themselves. Not only was it a great meta comment on the heart of the show (the Doctor changes faces but is always the Doctor), but it went to the heart of the Doctor’s choice about ending the Time War–beneath our external differences were are all connected, and to kill the children is to kill yourself, because they are part of you.
Then there was the way Rose/the Moment was alluding to the angel in “It’s A Wonderful Life” who shows Jimmy Stewart what the world would be like without him…Oh, hold on…I said I was only go to say one thing.
OK, back in a while…
22 November 2013 at 22:00 #21179Cheers to all from the blenkinsop household.
Mrs Blenkinsop and I have opened a fine bottle of Australian shiraz (which I feel would be approved of by the third Doctor in particular)
We toast you all!
21 November 2013 at 21:24 #21101@craig and fellow Enthusiasts
Alas! As I am currently residing in the Who-challenged Canadian colonies without access to the one cable station that will be screening this, I shall have to wait for my pre-ordered DVD to arrive in early December.
But on the bright side, this gives Mrs Blenkinsop and I more time to prepare the blenkinsop TV room for optimal viewing pleasure. (I have outlined a couple of preparations already in play to @wolfweed on the trailer page).
One vital preparation will be having the music of John Smith and the Common Men
http://www.juno.co.uk/products/sounds-from-the-inferno-1-per-customer/486573-01/
played on a continuous loop in the hours prior to the screening.
Mrs Blenkinsop has promised her 1963 coiffure will be ready in time!
21 November 2013 at 14:17 #21068I can’t rule out a political assassination at some point
I resign!
(True, I am not living up to my monicker, but, as Orwell noted: “Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.” And who am I to dispute George?)
21 November 2013 at 13:03 #21066I see that so far there is only one President, and it is me!
I promise to rule wisely.
When I told her, Mrs Blenkinsop’s response was: “Funny, you don’t look like Timothy Dalton”.
20 November 2013 at 21:28 #21039Holy smoke! I am…The President!
19 November 2013 at 16:29 #20962Oh dear, I forgot to put on the pince nez this morning. Next thing you know, I’ll be leaving my teeth in the glass beside the bed.
19 November 2013 at 15:03 #20958The Radio Times covers.
Do my aging eyes deceive me, or is that Richard Hurndall instead of William Hartnell?
18 November 2013 at 17:35 #2090618 November 2013 at 17:20 #20904A voice of reason from the otherwise lukewarm-on-Who Canadian colonies:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/arts-video/chris-hannay-doctor-who/article15467639/
Sorry, @pedant, but I do not know how to lose the advertisement at the beginning.
16 November 2013 at 03:37 #20791Brilliant Bayeux Tapestry!
I see it over the blenkinsop and Mrs Blenkinsop bed.
15 November 2013 at 18:29 #20768@wolfweed #20766
OK, I give up…what’s the spoiler?
14 November 2013 at 12:54 #20681Crikey! Well, now we know. And it all makes sense.
12 November 2013 at 16:20 #20572@shazzbot. Just responding to your RSVP. Quite content to be represented by a less than super dooper low res version of my avatar. I think the warm and fuzzy look of the low res version will capture the mood of blenkinsop in his cups.
12 November 2013 at 12:33 #2056210 November 2013 at 16:39 #20489Inspired by @wolfweed‘s “blinovitchism”, I suspect that the intellectual trajectory of some of the regulars on this site (particularly the ones whose Who memories go back to the 60s and 70s) might–from undergradate days to the present–might go along the following lines:
Marxism-Poststructuralism-Postmodernism-Blinovitchism.
10 November 2013 at 15:38 #20485@craig. Excellent decision. Two weeks of bonkers theorising sans trolls. Hurrah!
9 November 2013 at 02:07 #20333@wolfweed. So it’s the Sunday one. That confirms my point about my predictive powers.
9 November 2013 at 02:03 #20332@wolfweed this one is only 40 seconds, so maybe they are saving the longer one for Sunday.
Then again, I predicted the Kennedy assassination would be in it, so all my predictions should be read accordingly.
9 November 2013 at 00:18 #20311Am sitting on a train with my phone. Just saw a 40 second version of tomorrow’s trailer. Seriously. Since this is the spoiler page I will only say. this: The Time War–big time. Where is @wolfweed when he is needed!
8 November 2013 at 19:40 #20283@shazzbot
blenkinsop as Flash Gordon? Well…no.
blenkinsop will have to be represented by his avatar.
Indeed, I think there will probably be a few surprises when all of you meet each other in the pub, and discover the faces behind the avatars.
Speaking of the booze-up at the pub, perhaps small photos of the avatars of those of us unable to attend due to our locations in far-flung colonies could be printed out and propped up on the table so that we were there with you, in spirit (and spirits), as it were.
8 November 2013 at 14:34 #20258@bluesqueakpip “Twelfth Night”, twins…it gets better and better!
Let’s face it, there is a child of River and the Doctor out there.
The child was born before “Silence in the Library”, but to a Doctor subsequent to 10. “River, you know my name. You whispered my name in my ear. There’s only one way I would ever tell anyone my name. There’s only one time I could.”
I also think that it is highly likely that the child was born to a Doctor subsequent to 11. In “A Good Man goes to War” when River takes his hand and places it on the cot: “I am telling you.” I think that from that point he knows he has/will have a child, but he does not know who it is.
@bluesqueakpip The Christmas story as a nativity play–brilliant. Or…possibly…the arc about Capaldi’s Doctor that will play out over the course of season 8.
8 November 2013 at 02:22 #20208@bluesqueakpip. That is truly brilliant. You have captured a lot of what I was groping for in a really elegant way. But what you are saying goes way beyond my paltry thoughts.
I just watched “The Eleventh Hour” again (as one does) and it would be so easy to see it as the birth of a new cycle of Doctors.
The Hurt Doctor? More and more I now believe he is between 8 and 9–however long that “life” lasted.
But there is something else. Perhaps (like the 6th room on the 1st floor of Amy’s house) it is in the corner of my eye and I haven’t noticed it yet. Time to sleep on it.
7 November 2013 at 21:47 #20196Ah, now that I have read the other pages carefully, I see I was not the first to see the news of the trailer. Well, retirement does mean life is lived at a slower pace.
7 November 2013 at 21:33 #20195Surely I cannot be the first to read about this on another site, but apparently the trailer airs on BBC 1 on Saturday at 8. Typically, I will be travelling and not see it. So, only 48 hours to get in those bonkers theories…
7 November 2013 at 14:08 #201527. Lee Harvey Oswald is a Zygon assassin, who, due to problems with the sights on his rifle, kills JFK by mistake instead of his intended Zygon target who is disguised as Jackie. In his haste to escape capture, LHO is disorientated and repeatedly bangs into the walls of the Texas School Book Depository, finally breaking a wall at the 4th attempt.
That is just too brilliant for words!
Of course, there is an interesting ontological question of when bonkers theorising becomes fanfic…
(My own view is that the solution lies entirely in understanding the position of the tongue relative to the cheek.)
Exactly! And @whohar‘s #7 occupies that “Moment” of genius between tongue and cheek.
*Now to go off and try and find a spot for the claim made in the Tessalector (“Time can be re-written; remember Kennedy”), Clara’s family name (Oswald), and…if only it were possible…Canton*
6 November 2013 at 21:21 #20102OK, back to nail my colours to the mast with more predictions for the 50th.
- There will be a 4th wall explanation…somehow. I really like the “Tinkerbell” allusion that @pedant talks about above.
- While it may not happen in the 50th, it will be set up for a future reveal that Clara is the daughter of the Doctor and the mother of Susan.
- Don’t agree with @jimthefish on the time lock. I think the Time Lock will be broken and the Doctor will no longer be the last of his kind.
- Do agree with @jimthefish that the regeneration limit will be resolved.
- Do not think we will find out why the TARDIS exploded, as Moffat writes for a general audience and for those the age of Linda Lee, and that audience do not obsess about a resolution to the exploding TARDIS (or the missing floor in Amelia’s house, even though I would love that one to be addressed).
- Despite my lingering attachment to the idea, there will be no Kennedy or Canton, I fear.
- The big one: Moffat will bring about a really major change to our understanding of the Doctor so that no future writing can be done without reference to the major change he will introduce. And that change will be….I just don’t know.
- Most of what Moffat will refer back to in the 50th will have been previously introduced by…Moffat. There will be little of consequence that was first introduced by RTD, save the Time War. As for BG Who, it will be there for “colour” (eg, Zygons), but less so for plot. The only possible exceptions will be the Time Lords (introduced in BG Who) and perhaps the Hartnell Doctor and Susan (see my second point).
- It will be brilliant, and we will want more. Immediately.
5 November 2013 at 20:00 #20081@osakahatter Suitably bonkers! However, I think that your theory would require the participation of Eccleston, to return at end of episode to replace Hurt. Come to think of it…Jenna Coleman was kept under wraps before Asylum, so who knows?
@phaseshift, @craig, @jimthefish, @juniperfish, @scaryb, @janetteb, @Shazzbot, @nick, @timeloop, @wolfweed, @bluesqueakpip, @pedant, @whohar, and well, everybody I have forgotten and everybody who is “lurking”.
There are only a few days left–both from the trailer and from the 50th. Perhaps now is the time for everyone to finally nail their colours to the mast, go out on a limb (and other mixed metaphors), and offer their prediction of what is going to happen in the 50th. It does not have to ultimately be proved correct, but it should be suitably insane while possessing some sort of narrative logic based on what we have seen so far.
For my part, I firmly believe that Moffat will “change the game” in a really quite dramatic way; so dramatic that no one will be able to write about the Doctor in a way that predated the 50th.
So, what is my bonkers prediction? Well, I have not entirely given up the idea that the previous Doctors (“our lives”) will fade in such a way that we will never again be able to revisit them (somewhat like Amy and Rory in New York), and only “exist” as long as we remember and believe in them.
But for a fully fledged bonkers prediction before the trailer hits…it will have to wait until I pick up Mrs Blenkinsop from work.
3 November 2013 at 14:29 #19985Somehow, I think it is related back to the 11th’s earlier loss of memory regarding the GI (at Clara’s grave at the end of The Snowmen). Now that we know that the GI entered the Doctor’s timestream to turn his victories into defeats, that loss of memory could be an example of the effect the GI had while in his timestream. There also has to be a reason why he retrieves a map of the London Underground, c. 1967 in The Snowmen.
Perhaps Rose (in a way I have not yet figured out–aided by Clara in the timestream perhaps?) was also painting “Bad Wolf” in more points in the Doctor’s timestream than was necessary for the resolution at the end of the 9th’s tenure (if that makes sense). The purpose was similar–to aid Clara this time to undo the damage caused by the GI after she enters the timestream to save the 11th (and all the other Doctors).
So perhaps we will see what we did not see in The Name of the Doctor–how Clara saved the Doctor by entering his time-stream (a quick flash to Clara in the London Underground c. 1967, and other examples).
I am not sure about any of this, but you asked for some ideas to get you started. Your wish is my command.
2 November 2013 at 14:09 #19895I wake up eager to discover what bonkers theories have been discussed during the long Canadian night, and I find…nothing! (Well, almost nothing.) As the Zygons failed to spark discussion, I now give you something that has been hiding in plain sight on the poster for the 50th…”Bad Wolf” painted on what looks to be the tiled walls of the London Underground.
I had assumed “Bad Wolf” had run its course during the Eccleston tenure, and the London Underground (circa 1967?) conjurs up the GI and…yeti?
And yet here it is on the poster.
So, I leave it with you. And I expect more this time!
*puts on best Hartnell voice: “Eh, eh, what? Come now, humph”*
31 October 2013 at 14:34 #19728Just love the Wholloween photo! Brilliant.
31 October 2013 at 13:55 #19724Yes, I think you are all correct…the Zygons will be there for “colour” rather than plot.
Canada is excellent so far (barring the absurd liquor laws in Ontario–ie, wine shops are a state controlled monopoly, with all the choice and variety that entails).
the weather down here has been fifty shades of shite – they never told me it would be like this
Ah, well, now you know why the publicity to potential immigrants is all beaches and gentle breezes. If people knew what the reality of summer was really like, no one would ever go there. But take heart–it will end soon. Well, next Easter, actually.
31 October 2013 at 12:50 #19712@nick. The status of the Zygon fleet. Here is my memory (admittedly it may be a false memory): the Zygon ship was destroyed, but there was a Zygon fleet out there somewhere on its way to Earth, and what happended to it was unresolved.
Admittedly, I am drawing on a memory of watching this 40 years ago, and these days I am lucky if I can remember what I was doing last night.
31 October 2013 at 12:06 #19696OK, bonkers theorising…the Zygons.
If I am correct, we have had very little (any?) theorising about what the Zygons are doing in the 50th. I am a little rusty on the Zygons, but the only things of potential relevance about the Zygons from the Tom Baker story that I recall is that they are shapeshifters and that there was no resolution to the state of the invading Zygon fleet at the end of the story (another loose end, perhaps?)
What sort of bonkers theory can be constructed from these morsels? Hmmm…well…still thinking…
No, I’m stumped.
Not a particularly auspicious start to a day of bonkers theorising, I am afraid.
30 October 2013 at 18:27 #19594@mini-htpbdets Well, as usual, @htpbdet had outfoxed us all again, by coming up with a theory none of us had thought of! There is something really appealing about it as well–the notion that the title of The Doctor is associated with an office one holds, and that our 11 Doctors have been, perhaps, trying to live by standards that had been abandoned by the Hurt Doctor.
I just re-watched the ending of The Name of the Doctor. I am not sure how to relate the above with the 11th saying “He’s me. There’s only me here, that’s the point”…and…”I said he was me. I never said he was the Doctor”. They would both imply that Hurt is one of the 11 (12?) Doctors.
But…are those statements necessarily incompatible with @htpbdet‘s theory? Well, not if the person becomes the office he holds, which may well exist in a culture that does not accord the importance to individual identity in the way we are used to. And also, think back to the wording of the mini-trailers, where the 11th talks about lives in the plural.
Lots more thought required on this one!
30 October 2013 at 13:22 #19582I awoke this morning and read through all the recent posts, and realised once again how much we have been affected by the loss of @htpbdet.
Yesterday morning I drove Mrs Blenkinsop to work, and told her the sad news. I found my voice cracking as I told her, and was rather stunned that I was as upset as I obviously was. When I brought her home in the evening, she read through everyone’s posts and was wiping away tears herself. I stood in the entrance to the kitchen, not wanting to intrude.
Then, as I was re-reading through all the posts again this morning I realised that yesterday I had also made a couple of posts about the show at the same time as I had posted about @htpbdet. And it seemed a bit unfeeling in retrospect. I think it took a few hours for the news to properly sink in. I suspect that may be true for others as well, as there has been a lull in our usual chaotic posts about some aspect or other of the show. And that is right. But on the other hand, I wonder if perhaps we shouldn’t feel guilty about doing once again what we all, and especially @htpbdet, loved doing; that is, sharing our thoughts and crazy ideas about this wonderful show.
I remember when I spoke at my father’s funeral over a decade ago, I reflected that one of the defining characteristics of my father was that he was a very funny man with a great sense of humour and the best way to celebrate him to to share the laughter that he encouraged. I wonder if that is also what we can do again (perhaps the only thing we, who are separated across the globe and who have never even seen each other’s faces, can do)–and that is to re-engage in the love of bonkers theorising that we shared with @htpbdet.
I wish I could start off again now, but I am, I confess, somewhat at a loss for bonkers theories right now. But if someone what to throw one out, I will respond. Not with the briliance and grace of @htpbdet, but with a similar sense of love and commitment for this wonderful show.
29 October 2013 at 14:56 #19528The link to “put your face into the Doctor Who title sequence” is great!
It is Mrs Blenkinsop’s birthday in a couple of days, and I think you have just found me the perfect present!
Now to join Facebook (I know!) find a suitable photo of Mrs Blenkinsop (who always refuses to be photographed) and do my best.
29 October 2013 at 13:59 #19520@scaryb, @jimthefish, @whohar, @shazzbot, @craig, @all,
The more I think about @htpbdet‘s wonderful posts on this site, I am also reminded of his erudite and civilised contributions on the Guardian site. For that reason, I hope @danmartinuk hears of his passing. While @htpbdet‘s posts are easy for us to access and re-read, it would wonderful if his family could retrieve his posts from the Guardian site. I do not know whether this is possible, and it is easy for me to suggest this, but impossible to implement it. But I just thought it would be nice testament to his ability to inspire those he touched through his posts.
29 October 2013 at 11:52 #1951527 October 2013 at 21:56 #19435Spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
Allworkandnoplaymakesjackadullboyallworkandnoplaymakesjackadullboyallworkandnoplaymakesjackadullboyallworka
I re-read the theory a couple of more times and am more and more impressed.
I particularly like the the combination of the Doctor creating the Dalek threat (and therefore the Time War itself) through his progressive encounters with them and the whole idea of amnesia and slowly recovered memory.
Not sure it even needs “The Moment” or the Hand of Omega, but am will to go with those as well.
Damn. When is 23 November going to happen? It seems as if time is slowing down.
27 October 2013 at 14:36 #19411AllworkandnoplaymakesJackadullboyallworkandnoplaymakesJackadullboyallworkandnoplaymakesJackadullboy
Hope that worked.
OK, that is a pretty good theory. But it is dependent on information from a comic version of DW. Really? I just cannot see Moffat constructing a story based on information from a comic and not from something very well known in the Who universe. In fact, being Moffat, I can see him only constructing a theory from information introduced by…Moffat.
Having said that I do like the way that the Hand of Omega is part of the theory. I have always felt that the ideas behind “Remembrance of the Daleks” were potentially good, but ruined by terrible execution (I know there are those out there who stand by that episode. But I am not one of them.)
But…yet…the beauty of incorporating the Hand of Omega is that it does tie it all back to the beginning.
Hmmm.
26 October 2013 at 13:47 #19359I am about to change my attitude to polls…sort of.
While I think polls on the show would be a bad idea(for all the reasons discussed), a poll on which is the best of the 50 excellent bonkers reasons for the non-appearance of the trailer might be fun. (has this been suggested? Apologies if so)
Maybe if it was set up so: 1. No one voted for themselves, 2. One vote only, 3. A result after…100…200…300 votes.
And then no more polls…for a while.
25 October 2013 at 21:12 #19333A new (old) Doctor on the front page!
And an excellent rendition of Troughton, no less!
Hats off to all responsible!
24 October 2013 at 19:17 #19231They have added North American locations to the map of where to view the 50th in 3D cinemas:
http://www.doctorwho.tv/watch-the-day-of-the-doctor/
And it turns out that they are to screen it at my local in the wilds of Ontario! Hurrah!
It would have been good to see it in London, but Mrs Blenkinsop gently reminded me that the blenkinsop piggy bank is not as full as it once was (could it be all those DVDs and the imported Australian shiraz?)
Now to decide on the most appropriate attire for the screening on a cold Ontario November evening…
As a Yeti, perhaps…?
-
AuthorPosts
