Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
7 August 2013 at 05:25 #15621
I wouldn’t expect PC to be in the 50th, but rather waiting in the wings for for the Christmas special–but then none of us expected to see JC in “Asylum of the Daleks”, so who knows?
I can’t help thinking of an old “Next Generation” episode where a Romulan was kept in the shadows, but when you heard the voice you thought: “Hold on, isn’t that…?” And then, lo and behold, 2 episodes later there was a jaw-dropping reveal of…but no, that is definitely a Spoiler!
6 August 2013 at 22:49 #15604Have just been thinking about Clara (as one does) over a cup of coffee. With PC on board next year, I wonder what they will do with Clara? As has been noted above (somewhere, sorry–forgot who) she has really played out her role as the Girl Who Was Born To Save The Doctor–although, arguably, there might be more to that in the 50th.
But who is the “real” Clara? I admit to remaining somewhat confused on this. Is she simply the woman who looks after the two children in contemporary London? Are we going to see more of those children (shudder!)? Or was she quite literally born to save the Doctor? In other words, what narrative logic will she serve for the 12th Doctor now that she has successfully saved the Doctor? Am I making this all too complicated? Probably.
Time for another cup of coffee.
6 August 2013 at 06:02 #15511In light of the announcement of PC as 12, I have been thinking back to the Tardis makeover. At the time, there was a lot of discussion on this board about it, and, as I recall, a lot of people were quite unsure as to why it had happened. After all, it was expensive, and so many people loved the 11th’s Tardis interior from TEH on.
But now we know a lot more that may help explain the makeover, and perhaps even point towards the season 8. We now know that MS knew for a long time that he would be going at the end of the year. We now know that SM was planning ahead with that knowledge in mind. We now know that SM had only one person on his short-list for the 12th–PC.
So, I wonder if the Tardis got the makeoever it got in order to prepare us for the new Doctor and season 8? Because, when you think about it, it is a very different look. Gone is the steam punk clutter of the Tardis under 10 and 11, which suited the youth of 10 and 11. The new Tardis interior is, as others have pointed out, harking back to the simpler interiors of the early Doctors.
Somehow, I think this (the new Tardis, the new Doctor, the new direction for the show in season 8 that JC has talked about) has all been planned for quite a long time.
Of course, if the Tardis undergoes another makeover when 11 regenerates into 12, then it make rubbish of everything I have just said. But somehow, I think that this time the Tardis will stay the same.
5 August 2013 at 23:58 #155084 August 2013 at 21:13 #15251Bleary-eyed, but awake. The Doctor is in safe hands, methinks.
And it wasn’t a tin dog, after all. So that’s good.
4 August 2013 at 09:39 #15039Hello @juniperfish! Great to see you again (well, your avatar, anyway). If only we could entice @bobbingbird back from his rural idyll, and @whohar out of the bath. It seem somehow incomplete that they are not here to witness the birth of a new Doctor.
Or, perchance, a number of new Doctors? No, perhaps not.
Of course, the one thing about Moffat that unites everybody, is the belief that Moffat lies. So perhaps a new Doctor will be revealed in a few hours, and then when the Christmas special airs it will a be different Doctor! No, that is probably too conspiratorial even for Moffat.
Alas, I will probably be asleep in the colonies when it all happens, so I am looking forward to the responses of my fellow Enthusiasts when I wake up.
3 August 2013 at 09:59 #14951Many thanks for uploading that special on the 7th Doctor.
3 August 2013 at 00:28 #14930Thanks so much for that link. I am especially looking forward to “An Adventure in Space and Time”, and in some ways it has been a bit lost in all the discussion of the 50th and season 8.
I was particularly taken by Mark Gatiss talking about his response to seeing the interior of the Tardis. I am fully expecting to blub when I see the white interior and the original console. Luckily, Mrs Blenkinsop will be on hand with tissues.
2 August 2013 at 10:29 #14818I was finishing dinner (the colonies, remember) thinking about my previous idea that a live show revealing the next Doctor might result in a very, very, well known actor being revealed, and then I read @tardisblue‘s amazing post, and it started me thinking.
If (if, mind) I am right and the dynamics of a live broadcast imply a very well known actor being revealed as the next Doctor, and then running with @tardisblue‘s friend-of-a-friend, of-a-friend, etc, story that season 8 is about the young Doctor before he left Galifrey (and keeping in mind Moffat, etc, saying that season 8 would send the show off in a different direction) then…who might a VERY well known actor–who only has to commit for one season–be?
OK, I know this will sound crazy, but (given that an actor with the Hollywood profile–and huge number of projects–of Benedict Cumberbatch still commits to Sherlock) what about…Daniel Radcliffe?
Of course, to put all the above ramblings into perspective, perhaps I will now go back and finish off the bottle of wine.
2 August 2013 at 09:12 #14813OK, as I was saying,
When they do the live show on Sunday, I wonder if they build up the audience into a frenzy, pull apart the curtain, and…out comes someone no-one knows. Terrible pause as people ask: “umm, who is it?”
Sooo…I wonder if this means it might be someone really, really well known? (at which point crowd goes wild)
2 August 2013 at 09:08 #14812Hello @scaryb
Very very excited about announcement coming up on Sun
Yes, I think many of us are (well you and me for starters)
When the live show happens I wonder if…oh. perhaps I should finish this on the Spoilers thread. Off there now to do just that.
2 August 2013 at 01:03 #14793Assuming it is any previous Doctor, there is not simply the Troughton connection. There is also the daughter of Peter Davison and wife of David Tennant–Georgia Moffett, who played the Doctor’s daughter.
Also probably bollocks…
1 August 2013 at 22:52 #14780I do like the idea of linking “The Fires of Pompeii” to the next Doctor.
(Cracking bonkers theory, btw, @craig)
I recall that the actor protraying a new companion sometimes had their first outing in another episode, as a different character. And Karen Gillan made an appearance in “The Fires of Pompeii”. And so, of course, did Peter Capaldi. Hmm.
Still, he does seem to be an awfully busy actor (and director) to commit. Then again, there is a lovely symmetry involved in @craig‘s bonkers theory.
31 July 2013 at 00:38 #14640Not sure if this is a spoiler, seems more like public speculation to me, but best to err on the side of caution:
When I read it, I thought: “Yes, he probably could carry it off”. But my hesitation is that he is, perhaps, too well known for other roles. I always thought that was an impediment for Peter Davison. I tended to feel that “Tristan” often hovered disconcertingly over his Doctor.
If only the BBC realised the appeal of the blenkinsop rotating Doctors theory!
29 July 2013 at 12:39 #14575OK, I have been lurking on the sidelines for a while, but I feel the need to come in and say that these sort of polls annoy me no end!
They take absolutely no account of context. Will a 60 year old answer the same way as Linda Lee? Well, no.
I hate to say this, but…WHO CARES about whether X% felt this or Y% felt that? I not want to put Dr Who on a pedestal with…let’s say…(since it has a Dr Who connection)…Vincent Van Gogh, but would we really take seriously a poll that asked “who was best…Van Gogh or Banksy?”
Come on…let’s get back to the important stuff…bonkers theorising!
And, for what it’s worth, I think Verity Lambert Who was fabulous and so is Moffat Who. But…so what?
Anyway, back to bonkers theorising…
22 July 2013 at 12:19 #14268Let’s hope so, indeed . McGann certainly deserves it.
22 July 2013 at 09:30 #14254Have been looking at the wonderful images of the Daleks from the 50th (many thanks indeed @wolfweed) and agree with @janetteb that this is Gallifrey, and this is the Time War. And as I think about it more and more, I wonder (just like Asylum of the Daleks when Jenna Coleman’s appearance was a complete surprise to everyone) whether they have managed to keep another appearance totally under wraps.
If so, who might it be? Well, it now seems increasingly obvious that the Hurt Doctor is the the Doctor (who is not allowed to bear the name of Doctor) who followed…Oh dear…
POTENTIAL SPOILER (for the handful of people on the planet reading this blog who haven’t been, well…reading this blog)
…Paul McGann’s Doctor. If so, how do you (as a scriptwriter) locate Hurt to the audience without showing where he came from? And by the audience, I do not mean enthusiasts like us who know just about everything to do with Who lore, but to Who fans who know some Who lore, but only some? Or to the wider audience? Well, perhaps by SHOWING where the Hurt Doctor came from. Which means (after a long, long, ramble) might there be a chance that we will finally see Paul McGann’s Doctor actually integrated into the show?
Maybe not, but…they did manage to keep Jenna Coleman’s appearance in Asylum as a total surprise….
21 July 2013 at 05:17 #14227@janetteb Many thanks, my loyal supporter! Alas, like you, however, I suspect that this particular bonkers theory will not be realised.
Or Kennedy…
Or the return of Canton…
Damn. Now I am all maudlin. Time to cheer myself up with a really good episode. And there are, well, so many to choose from!
21 July 2013 at 04:44 #14224@scaryb [waves hello]
Bonkers theorising was pretty much stopped in its tracks with Matt’s announcement. It’s having a breather till Sept (not a fixed poiint, but most likely). Unless you want to start it again now
Well, no, actual new bonkers theorising requires too much brain power than I can muster on a lazy Sunday afternoon. However, until someone announces the name of an actor to replace MS, I will stand by my existing bonkers theory that the next season will be a revolving door of multiple Doctors.
It might not prove to be true (my bonkers theories rarely do) but I hope it captures the spirit of the banner at the top of the page:
Theories even more insane than what’s actually happening.
20 July 2013 at 02:18 #14186Greetings all. Sorry to have been absent, but I have been a trifle distracted of late, whipping around through time and space, and various Qantas Club Lounges.
Have been dipping in of course, but have noticed a distinct lull in bonkers theorising of late. Hmm, Hmm. Well… [try to imagine last bit in gruff William Hartnell voice]
But having seen the wonderful Cusick Dalek images found by @wolfweed, I think I should throw in my 2 cents worth. And it is this:
While I agree wholeheartedly with @htpbdet and @jimthefish that Cusick’s importance to the Daleks has been criminally neglected, and while I wholeheartedly agree that without his artistic vision the Daleks would not hold the iconic importance that they do, I think it is a bit unfair on Terry Nation to claim that the appeal of the Daleks is 90-98% Cusick and only 10% or even 2% Nation.
The Daleks captured the imagination of a generation in a very short amount of time in 1963-64. Importantly, during those early years they were terrifying. And they were terrifying, I would argue, because of Terry Nation. Take The Dalek Invasion of Earth, for example. That was a tremendously mature and dark story for children in 1964. It challenged its young viewers to grapple with very confronting themes: war, violence, self-sacrifice, and resistance to tyranny. The quality of that story, and the quality of those early appearances by the Daleks cannot really be appreciated, I believe, without reference to the power and maturity of Nation’s writing.
True, the early, dark and frightening vision of the Daleks was very quickly blunted, and they were turned into figures of fun (only a year later in The Chase, they were simply buffoons), but the Daleks could, and have, outlived their many (perhaps too many) iterations over the years. Why? Well, as I have tried to say above, because of the combination of Cusick’s vision and Nation’s vision (and, I would add, Verity Lambert’s vision) that was realised in their early appearances in 1963-64.
So, yes, there should be more recognition for Cusick when we look at the importance of the Daleks to Doctor Who, but I hesitate to put into percentage terms the importance of Cusick, Terry Nation and Verity Lambert. The phenomenon of the Daleks was a fortuitous combination of Cusick, Nation and Lambert at a very particular moment in the history of the show–1963-64.
One of the many reasons why I am waiting with bated breath for Mark Gattis’s treatment of that moment in An Adventure in Space and Time.
12 June 2013 at 17:00 #12159We shall continue to believe in the multiple regenerating Doctors in the face of logic and skepticism, because it is such an insanely appealing idea! (Well, at the very least, it’s insane)
Have arrived at the Club Lounge in one of the former American colonies, before continuing the journey to the colonial Dominion to the north. Travelling in space and time is much more fun on Doctor Who than it is in reality…
11 June 2013 at 23:57 #12149A Club Lounge thought. Why still no announcement on the identity of the next Doctor? Well, don’t rule out the blenkinsop multiple regenerating Doctors theory…
11 June 2013 at 23:15 #12148Fellow enthusiasts. Greetings from the home away from home of blenkinsop–the Qantas Club Lounge. And this time accompanied by Mrs Blenkinsop–hurrah!
5 June 2013 at 09:19 #11866Try and imagine the lightshow projected on a building at least 50 feet high. Spectacular. I hope London gets something similar.
I don’t think I will try fan fiction, however. But I will still keep thinking about how the multiple regenerations might work. This is a site about coming up with “theories more insane than what is actually happening”, after all. I approach my multiple Doctors theory in that spirit.
5 June 2013 at 04:33 #11864Isn’t wine wonderful! Some of my best ideas have come at the wine bar Mrs Blenkinsop and I frequent close to our apartment.
Only last night were were back there (a great little place at Circular Quay across from the Opera House) discussing timey-wimey ways of bringing in a Doctor a week. We both agreed that a search would have to be involved, and perhaps something that revisited familiar locales and people (say, Craig and Sophie and little Stormaggedon, for example) but where (because the Doctor was different–at least looked different) the challenge would be for the newly re-generated Doctor to effectively assert his Doctor-like authority with the people he encounters to solve the mystery by the end of the episode.
And next week, we are both off to the Qantas Club Lounge…the site of many a bonkers theory!
4 June 2013 at 03:38 #11817@whohar, @janetteb, @jimthefish
Glad you like my bonkers idea of series 8 having a series of multiple Doctors constantly regenerating. I have been thinking about how it might actually work. I think I also suggested that perhaps John Hurt’s Doctor might hang around and be somehow responsible, with a one season arc along the lines of “The Key to Time” or (shudder!) “Trial of a Timelord”. But personally, I would not want those to be used as templates, and the problem with the Hurt Doctor manipulating it does conjure up an image of a rather dark season.
On the other hand, too much comedy really would make the regenerations gimmicky and reminiscent of Moffat’s Comic Relief sketch.
And yet, and yet, I still think it might really work if done well.
More thought required.
3 June 2013 at 04:28 #11729I have a feeling that Moffat won’t be content to just replace Matt Smith with another 3-year incumbent. Partly, because I do not think he would want to hand over “his” Doctor to another showrunner, and partly because I still feel he wants to do something no-one has done before.
Further up I conjectured that he has already told us the answer–it is John Hurt and Season 8 will be out of order, and set during the Time War, and Hurt will only last a year, as will Moffat. But I am willing to accept that the suits at the BBC will want a younger Doctor for an entire season.
So, here is my next bonkers idea: what if season 8 involves multiple regenerations, perhaps even one a week, because of some timey-wimey problem? Think about it for a minute. Instead of a whole season trying to discover the mystery of the companion (ie, s7 with the mystery of: “Clara: who is she?”) it could be a whole season of different Doctors constantly in flux. Perhaps the whole timey-wimey multiple regenerations might be manipulated by the Hurt Doctor, or even the Great Intelligence. And it would be a way to guarantee the audience tuned in each week to see what the “new” Doctor was like. Moffat played with this idea of multiple regenerations in his Comic Relief sketch, and well, he has been known to re-use ideas and material he has used before. And it puts a whole new spin on Doctor Who?
Whatever else he does, Moffat won’t do anything ordinary in what I think most of us assume will be his last year at the helm.
3 June 2013 at 00:31 #11719David Thewlis–inspired! Yes, he would be great.
2 June 2013 at 01:39 #11570Back with a caffeine-induced bonkers idea for the next Doctor. What if Moffat has already told us who it is, by leaving it in plain sight? What if the next Doctor really is…John Hurt?
It could be done in various ways. Either all of season 8 could be all about the Time War, and it will tell the story of how the Hurt Doctor lost his right to be called the Doctor. In other words, season 8 will be out of sequence. Or, perhaps each and every Doctor actually knows about his future versions, and the 50th and the Christmas special will be about the Hurt Doctor redeeming himself with the aid of his previous versions, the 10th and 11th–to become the next Doctor. Or…well, there is only so much that coffee can do.
But…could it actually be John Hurt in some sort of timey-wimey way?
2 June 2013 at 01:04 #11563@craig. Thanks for taking up the suggestion.
Well, as I said a few minutes ago on the “Doctor Who News” thread, part of me would like to see an older Doctor. Nominations:
David Warner: He has the authority needed for the Doctor written all over him. He could be a stern Doctor, but he can do gentility and humour effortlessly.
Bill Nighy. Whimsy and humour simply pour out of the man! And he has this wicked gleam in his eye that seems tailor-made for the Doctor.
Helen Mirren: Is there anything she cannot do? She, like Bill Nighy and David Warner, would step into the shoes gracefully and effortlessly. (By the way, her gender is irrelevant. I was just watching “The Aztecs” again last night, and the whole show depends on Barbara being perceived to be the re-incarnation of a male Aztec god. It is explained with economy, the characters accept it, the viewer accepts it, and the show works brilliantly at all levels. If they could do that gender-switch in the early 60s, they could do it now.)
There are others that will come to me (after the second cup of coffee), but one thing to keep in mind about older actors is that they move…well…more slowly! The pace of the show would have to change, but that is not necessarily a bad thing.
Not sure I have done it adequately above, but it would be great if our suggestion go with reasons why, or examples of previous work, as I confess to be out of touch with a lot of younger British actors. (What an old geezer admission!)
Anyway, time for the croissant and second cup of coffee and more thought.
2 June 2013 at 00:12 #11551My goodness. What alarming news to wake up to in the colonies. Like most of us on this site, I think Matt Smith was truly brilliant. An actor who could project age and wisdom beyond his years, who could jump from humour to anger to whimsy to sadness in a seamless and convincing way, and an actor who successfully managed to bridge old and nu Who in his portrayal of the Doctor. I know that others will give him more dedicated reflection and admiration on these pages in the coming days and weeks. For now, and from me, he was the Doctor who brought the magic back to the show that I had not felt since my childhood experience of Hartnell in the 60s.
But the future! Who will be the new Doctor? I know we will all have an opinion. Part of Matt’s strength was that he could run and jump as fast as the frentic pace Moffat has imposed on the show demanded . Clearly, an older actor could not do that, but part of me would love to see an older actor as the Doctor again. Someone like…well, Bill Nighy or David Warner, for example. Yes, I know they have already appeared, but then there has been examples of recent companions who have appeared and then…re-appeared. And who knows how the devious mind of Steven Moffat works.
So, @craig. Perhaps a new page for us to speculate on…”The next Doctor?”
31 May 2013 at 04:50 #11429Funnily enough, two of the most rubbish monsters come from two of my all-time favourite Hartnell episodes.
In the absolutely brilliant “Dalek Invasion of Earth”, that saw the heart-rending exit of Susan, there is this thing called a Slyther. Well, anyone who has seen that episode will know what I am talking about! Even the impressionable 12-year old that I was when I watched it could tell that this giant fungus that was very unsteady on its feet and sounded like it was suffering from a bad case of croup was, well, embarrassing!
The other was from another favourite episode, “The Chase”, that saw the departure of Ian and Barbara back to 1960s London. It was the robot version of the Doctor created by the Daleks. Unlike the tesalector version of 11 (that fooled most of us), this poor duplicate unfortunately looked nothing like William Hartnell! Come to think of it, even the Daleks were pretty rubbish in that story. But to be fair, it was, for the most part, played for laughs.
Ah, but somehow, in spite of those two rubbish monsters, those two episodes of Doctor Who will remain fondly in my memories forever. Why? Because the show was always more than the sum of its rubbish monsters. And that is why I am still here, enthusing over the show.
31 May 2013 at 02:15 #11425Adolf…brilliant!
30 May 2013 at 22:24 #11405My five cent’s worth on like buttons. I oppose them, and, to be honest, I oppose the smiley faces as well. The beauty of this site is the argument (in the best possible and civilised sense). That means talking, and well-thought out discussion. The type of posts that @phaseshift and others do so well. More talk, less visual replacements for discussion
29 May 2013 at 09:47 #11279Wow, that is quite a theory! I confess that I have never really got my head around the Leaf. But–and I hate to be a party pooper–could the leaf simply be a metaphor for (or symbol of) parental love?
29 May 2013 at 05:41 #11275I wonder if all this should be on the Spoilers page?
So here is what we know so far
Not everybody is aware of all of this. I know I wasn’t.
29 May 2013 at 01:21 #11270It changed its own timeline when it went into the Doctor’s timeline. You can see the moment in The Snowmen when it changes itself – the Doctor removes Simeon’s memories, the GI starts dying – and then revives, with the words ‘now the dream outlives the dreamer’.
So, yes, significant. But significant because it shows that you can change your own time-line.
Good point. Shows the dangers of posting after only one cup of coffee.
28 May 2013 at 23:57 #11260Two things keep rolling around in the back of my head. 1. That this representation of the GI seems rather different from his/its original incarnation in old Who (and this is not the case with other monsters/antagonists from old Who that are brought back in nu Who); and more importantly, 2. the fact that the Doctor could not really remember the GI in The Snowmen. I have not seen a good explanation for that yet. And I think it is significant.
28 May 2013 at 23:35 #11257Perhaps it is time to move an idea I raised yesterday on TNoTD thread about the Great Intelligence over to this thread, as it may have implications for what happens in November.
Picking up on the questions I asked yesterday, what if there is a connection between the GI and the Hurt Doctor? What if there has been a long game plan, begun in The Snowmen (or earlier), by the GI to locate and release the Hurt Doctor? Seen this way, the GI could have, for some time, being looking for The Impossible Girl, just so that she would do exactly what she did in TNoTD–jump into the Doctor’s time-stream to save him, but with the unintended (for Clara and the Doctor) but intended (for the GI) consequence of locating and releasing the Hurt Doctor. Indeed, if there is a relationship between the GI and the Hurt Doctor, who is controlling who? Is it the GI who wants to access the Hurt Doctor for some reason, or is it the Hurt Doctor who has been using the GI for his own ends?
However, since this post is after only one cup of coffee, I may feel differently after two.
28 May 2013 at 12:22 #11197The Great Intelligence. Some questions:
1. Have we seen the last of him/it? Presumably yes, as the Doctor stated he (the GI) would die if he entered the Doctor’s time-stream. Of course, neither Clara nor the Doctor suffered that fate.
2. Why did the Great Intelligence want to utterly destroy the Doctor and his impact on the universe? What was his motivation? Surely not simply revenge for being bettered by the Doctor in “The Snowmen”?
3. If the Great Intelligence was, well, intelligent, then wouldn’t he have realised that all that had to happen was that Clara would sacrifice herself by jumping into the time-stream to undo all the damage wrought by The Great Intelligence?
4. Is it just me, or does this Great Intelligence seems to be a very different kettle of fish to the one introduced in Troughton’s day with the Yeti? (My point here is that other old Who monsters/antagonists have been re-visited in a way that is true to their representation and motivation in old Who)
5. Is there a relationship between the Hurt Doctor and the Great Intelligence? Think about it. It was only because of the GI we ended up in the Doctor’s time-stream and encountered (released?) the Hurt Doctor. Also see back to my question #2.
Now I shall go off and think about more Who-related food for the 50th party.
28 May 2013 at 03:53 #1118128 May 2013 at 03:15 #11180I hope they don’t bring that back in.
Although you have moved to the colonies, I see you have yet to get the hang of colonial humour. <no smiley face, as i do not believe in them>
Actually, I think we both agree that he will do something audacious, that he is a fan, and that he will move on. I just think that he will do something in the 50th in a narrative way, that will make it impossible for future showrunners to run with the show without reference to what he has done (if that sentence makes sense).
28 May 2013 at 02:49 #1117828 May 2013 at 02:23 #11174Of course. Thanks. Now I remember (with the aid of a second coffee).
I must say, I have had a feeling for a long time that Moffat has wanted to have the last word on Doctor Who. I cannot see him killing off the show, of course, but I can see him as creating a rupture of such import that no one will be able to write Doctor Who in the same way ever again. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he is planning something so big that people will talk about Doctor Who in terms of “before Moffat” and “after Moffat”.
28 May 2013 at 01:55 #1117228 May 2013 at 01:47 #11169Ten plus 11
Back on “The Name of the Doctor” thread at #9952 and #9953, it was @lbelanger17 and, well…me, who raised that.
Your attention is slipping!
26 May 2013 at 22:01 #11086Apropos of nothing, watched the first episode of Sherlock again last night and realised that Watson’s sister Harry’s girlfriend is named Clara. The Moff moves in mysterious ways.
25 May 2013 at 11:46 #10860The name of Oswin. Clara is Oswin Oswald when she is a Dalek and when she is a nanny in Victorian England (even though, as I recall, no one calls her Clara Oswin Oswald until we see it on her gravestone at the end of “The Snowmen”). Surely, the name Oswin has some significance? I recall us debating it endlessly after both “Asylum’ and “Snowmen”, but now it seems to have dropped off the radar. In light of TNOTD, does it still have significance?
25 May 2013 at 10:41 #10852“tailing off”… Oh, @chickenelly. I do so hope that was not a comment on my last post. I am desolate.
25 May 2013 at 10:37 #10850Just re-watched “Vincent and the Doctor”. What a perfect episode. Everything about it works. Both Mrs Blenkinsop and I were wiping away a tear at the end. It also was perhaps the only episode in Nu Who to truly re-capture the spirit of the educational, historical episodes of Hartnell Who.
-
AuthorPosts
