Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
6 May 2013 at 11:45 #7991
@whohar. It is almost 9pm in my part of the colonies. You are just being…well…provocative, aren’t you!
6 May 2013 at 11:26 #7988Clara is Strax!!
That is brilliant!…Of course, I have just finished off a good bottle of red. So that might have something to do with my response…
6 May 2013 at 09:15 #7968@htpbdet. We are kindred souls, my friend.
6 May 2013 at 09:11 #7967@htpbdet. We are kindred souls, my friend.
6 May 2013 at 02:20 #7955Talking of moaning minnies, I wonder if any of the people on the Telegraph, Daily Mail, etc who go on and on about the “gay” agenda of nu Who, have picked up that one of the targets of S7 (and the Doctor) is “Victorian values”?
That was one of the many things I liked about “The Crimson Horror” (And “The Snowmen”). They actually had a very nice critical take on Victorian values–and not just with reference to identity politics (Madame Vastra and Jenny) but also with reference to exploitation. In both, the workers and the poor are literally fodder to be devoured. And as Mr Simeon (and presumably the Daily Mail) says: “What’s wrong with Victorian values?”
6 May 2013 at 02:04 #7954@htpbdet. Nothing wrong with being optimistic. Surely, the capacity to be optimistic is why we are on this wonderful site, rather than with all the moaning minnies on the other (unnamed) sites!
I don’t think he will repeat himself. Moffat is, I think, to clever for that. But when you think back on it, Moffat has this capacity to confound all of us at the resolution. Was there any one of us who predicted the tinkerbell solution in Season 5, or the Tessalector in Season 6? Maybe, but I have forgotten.
And it may well be that the Doctor is not in control as we head to the fields at Trenzalore, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he was, and had a plan.
6 May 2013 at 01:35 #7949@htpbdet. #7912
Actually, I am wondering if the Doctor is more in control than we think.
In many ways, I think that Moffat has modelled the Doctor on…Moffat! They are both full of tremendous enthusiasm, they are both somewhat cocky, they both lie to achieve their own ends, and they both weave incredibly convoluted plots to achieve their ends. So, I am not sure that Moffat would write a scenario where the Doctor was not ultimately in control and behind it all.
5 May 2013 at 10:39 #7844Well, finally got to see the episode in the colonies. A ripping yarn! Reminded me quite a bit of one of Gattis’s Lucifer Box novels.
Saw it as a stand alone, but must confess that the attitude of Clara towards the Doctor is starting to make me doubt my theory of Clara-as-daughter. But we shall see.
Found it interesting that both Clara and the Doctor dress for the occasion. Think of the comparison with Amy, who could turn up in rural France in the 19th century with Van Gogh, wearing a mini skirt and boots (Amy, that is, not Van Gogh).
For me, there was, yet again, no evidence of a “dark” Doctor. The Doctor remained the moral core of the show.
In terms of where it is all leading, in Seasons 5 and 6 the Doctor knew precisely where everything was heading. He knew, for example (long before we did), that Amy was a ganger. He had a plan–Doctor as tessalector–that showed he was in control of his fate at Lake Silencio. Now, in this season, it would seem that he does not know what is going on with either Clara’s identity or with the Great Intelligence. But on the evidence of past experience of the Doctor seeming not to know, but in reality knowing all along…I wonder.
5 May 2013 at 01:16 #7830Just re-watched the end of this again. Why was Clara in this particular graveyard? Who was her friend–too young to be the mother of the Maitland children I suppose?
4 May 2013 at 01:42 #7695@shazzbot. Ah, but spare a thought for those of us with hardly any hair left!
Yes, indeed, the stories are what it is all about. But, to use my Shakespeare analogy above, the Cliff Notes of each play can only go so far. The real experience of Shakespeare is watching it.
So…”The Aztecs”. Trust me. You won’t regret it.
4 May 2013 at 00:44 #7690Whoops. Double post. Sorry about that.
4 May 2013 at 00:41 #7689I have been thinking about people like @shazzbot, who have no experience of watching classic Who, or who (hi @shazzbot again!) are hesitant to watch classic Who because of the wonky sets, slow pace, lack of special effects, etc).
There are at least two reasons why I would love those who are enthusiasts of nu Who to embrace classic Who. First, the sheer wonder of classic Who, and second, it will provide an added dimension to the experience of watching the 50th, when it is probable that there will allusions, references, etc to classic Who.
So, if we old (sometimes painfully old) lovers of classic Who were to suggest places for those who have only seen nu Who to begin–in a way that showed them there is nothing to fear from the experience of watching classic Who–what shows would we suggest? I would probably suggest those stories set in the past, as those set in the future do raise the thorny issue of wonky sets of spaceships for those young’uns who have been raised on sophisticated digital special effects.
Where to start? For Hartnell, I would suggest “The Aztecs”. It captures a lot of the best of the early years, and the sets can be appreciated in the same way as a minimalist stage production of Shakespeare. For a wonderfully complex plot that lies at the heart of Who lore (and to begin to dip one’s toes into the future) I would suggest “The War Games”.
Others might have different choices.
4 May 2013 at 00:40 #7688I have been thinking about people like @shazzbot, who have no experience of watching classic Who, or who (hi @shazzbot again!) are hesitant to watch classic Who because of the wonky sets, slow pace, lack of special effects, etc).
There are at least two reasons why I would love those who are enthusiasts of nu Who to embrace classic Who. First, the sheer wonder of classic Who, and second, it will provide an added dimension to the experience of watching the 50th, when it is probable that there will allusions, references, etc to classic Who.
So, if we old (sometimes painfully old) lovers of classic Who were to suggest places for those who have only seen nu Who to begin–in a way that showed them there is nothing to fear from the experience of watching classic Who–what shows would we suggest? I would probably suggest those stories set in the past, as those set in the future do raise the thorny issue of wonky sets of spaceships for those young’uns who have been raised on sophisticated digital special effects.
Where to start? For Hartnell, I would suggest “The Aztecs”. It captures a lot of the best of the early years, and the sets can be appreciated in the same way as a minimalist stage production of Shakespeare. For a wonderfully complex plot that lies at the heart of Who lore (and to begin to dip one’s toes into the future) I would suggest “The War Games”.
Others might have different choices.
2 May 2013 at 11:36 #7581@shazzbot. We shall repel them with wit, and mathematician humour.
2 May 2013 at 10:43 #7573@Shazzbot. Thanks! But…remind me not to take mathematicans on a pub crawl.
2 May 2013 at 10:30 #7566@shazzbot OK, you have to explain the mathematican “joke”. Neither Mrs Blenkinsop or I could figure it out.
2 May 2013 at 05:26 #7547@idiotsavon. No problem. Deleting is dificult, but there is an edit function, that functions for about 4 minutes after you post.
I really think you are onto something with “Run you clever boy, and remember” as a password to upload her.
The other thing that has struck me about her saying those words in “Asylum” and “Snowmen” is that she breaks the 4th wall and turns directly to the audience. Not sure what Moffat is intending by that yet, though.
2 May 2013 at 04:40 #7544Hello @idiotsavon. Welcome!
Love the computer-related list.
Especially #6 and #7.
The idea that the words “Run you clever boy, run” might be the key to download her is brilliant. But…didn’t she say those words to the Doctor (when she thought he was the help-line) in The Bells of St John when she was trying to connect to the WiFi? And yet she was only uploaded after she clicked on the symbol, not because of saying those words? (Have I got that right?) Anyway, the juxtaposition between the words and being uploaded is tantalisingly close.
And I love the fact that the computer code for deep red is C(lara)O(swin)O(swald)!
2 May 2013 at 04:17 #7542@bobbingbird. Your (double) post reminded me of @juniperfish‘s continuing belief in the dark Doctor.
I do not dispute the words of Dorium, @juniperfish, my fishy friend, but I am not at all sure that the Silence or indeed Madame Kovorian (which, as I recall, you also quoted) are the best examples to draw upon. They might think that the Doctor is a terrible fellow–as do the Daleks (or did, when they could remember him), but they are none of them what I would call, well…nice people. In other words, of course THEY will think he is dark. But they would, wouldn’t they?
I think that the Doctor has already been to his “dark” point under Moffat. It was when River berated him: “Doctor. We get that name from you, you know. But what will it mean if you continue…” (Sorry, forgotten the exact words).
But dark now? I think not.
Actually, those words of River’s may prove important in “The Name of the Doctor”. hmm.
1 May 2013 at 12:08 #7392@juniperfish. I was going to call it a night, then I saw your post about signs of the dark Doctor just as my computer was powering down. So I painfully turned on my old steam-powered laptop again, which took forever. Does the Doctor lack empathy? I do not think so. What he does do is that he always makes people aware that not everything will always turn out for the best. If he does lack empathy, the he lacks it no more than Hartnell’s Doctor. He could be pretty dismissive of people if you recall. And I think there is a definite attempt by Moffat to link the 11th back to the beginning.
Think back to Hartnell. He closed the door on his own granddaughter, and left her to an uncertain fate, because he knew that she had grown up and needed to take on the burden of her own responsibilities. That was not the action of a dark Doctor, it was the action of loving and protective Doctor, who knew the time had come to say goodbye. In terms of “dark” I see nothing in the actions of the 11th to even compare to shutting that door. So when I look at the actions and the statements of the 11th, I do not see a dark Doctor. Or even a Doctor “becoming” dark.
That’s it. Bedtime.
1 May 2013 at 11:42 #7383@htpbdet Agree with you entirely about the Doctor-as-dark theory. I do not see any evidence for it myself. Maybe he experiences loss (Amy and Rory) but that is about it. No, I have always felt he is the one moral constant. Also the reason why I do not subscribe to the multiple Doctors, or Dalekised Doctor.
Just re-watched Bells of St John. He sits outside Clara’s room, protecting her. A dark Doctor? Really? What I see is a fiercely protective Doctor. One might even say…a paternally protective Doctor.
Well , I’d say that anyway!
1 May 2013 at 08:37 #7339Just re-watched “The Girl in the Fireplace”. Moffat’s first outing. There is a point where she (Madame de Pomdadour) says to the Doctor (after looking into his mind):
“Doctor. Doctor Who. It’s more than just a secret, isn’t it?” At which point he looks shocked and says: “What did you say?”
Moffat. He has been thinking about for a very long time.
1 May 2013 at 05:16 #7327@bobbingbird – Well, it all depends on your perspective. As I recall, you reside in an idyllic, small seaside town surrounded by sea, a gloriously big river with dolphins and turtles.
I am currently occupying a stuffy office where the airconditioning is not working. (Oh for the glory days of the Qantas Club Lounge)
So “Fab” is probably not the first word that comes to my mind.
1 May 2013 at 04:06 #7319A quick post from my lunch break.
@janetteb Intriguing idea about why they needed an entertainments officer on the Alaska!
Not buying Clara-as-early River just yet though. Apart from anything else, assuming both characters discover this to be the case, it raises the prospect of on-going sexual shenanigans between the Doctor and Clara during season 8. At that point I would remind you of your own point about the kiddy show.
Damn. Lunch is over. Back soon.
30 April 2013 at 10:03 #7241Insanely brilliant! That has always been my all-time favourite!
Whenever Mrs Blenkinsop and I are in a public place where there is someone who is loud and obnoxious, we always turn to each other and say: “Put him in the curry”
If only Moffat could find a way of using that line…
30 April 2013 at 09:54 #7239Needless to say, the colonies are enriched by your presence, my friend.
p.s. when does Fortesque and the bath arrive?
30 April 2013 at 09:50 #7238When you told me that your best friend was a potato, I felt that you would fit right into to the colonies. Now that I know about your strange drug (and, well, sexual) habits, I just KNOW you were meant to be here.
30 April 2013 at 09:40 #7236I don’t think Clara is Susan or a close relation of the Doctors, mostly because she snogged him and we are talking BBC kids show.
But as I recall, Amy made a very obvious attempt to convince the Doctor to have sex with her (just before her wedding) and she turned out to be…his mother-in-law!
So I do not think the snog between the Doctor and Clara will stop Clara turning out to be his daughter. (A theory I briefly doubted this morning. Thankfully, the doubt has passed.)
Now to the real issue:
I have just watched the Special about the First Dr
What!? And here is me (without access to BBC America) waiting patiently for the box set to be released on Amazon!
<Blenkinsop goes into a complete funk>
30 April 2013 at 01:45 #7226@Shazzbot. Now is the perfect time to go and buy the box sets of old Who. Mainly for the sheer pleasure of old Who! But start at the beginning–“An Unearthly Child”.
Everyone has THEIR Doctor and mine is Hartnell. As many on this board know, I watched “An Unearthly Child” at the impressionable age of 11 when it was first screened, and MY Who was the period between that episode and the departure of Susan at the end of “The Dalek Invasion of Earth”.
And here I am, 50 years later, still 11 years old every time I watch it.
29 April 2013 at 23:07 #7213@osakahatter. Agree 100%. I have also wondered if Moffat might find a way of referencing Hartnell’s lines after he leaves Susan on Earth: “Someday, I shall come back. Yes, someday, I shall come back.” Not sure if those are the exact words, but they are full of the possibility of returning to the beginning.
29 April 2013 at 22:49 #7210@bluesqueakpip Re: The Doctor and (his) Children. Wow, a really brilliant summary of the various possibilities. I particularly like your last scenario.
29 April 2013 at 22:07 #7200@whohar and @juniperfish Excellent list(s) of current bonkers theories.
I would add a sub-heading to 1n: Clara is River and the Doctor’s daughter
1n (a): Clara is River and the Doctor’s daughter–but not necssarily the 11th Doctor.
On the other hand, re-watching JttCotT last night, I am starting to wonder if Clara really is, in reality, “just an ordinary girl”. So confusing when one starts to doubt one’s own bonkers theories.
On the question of the Doctor’s name, when Clara points out that she had read his name in the book, the thing he seemed to get quite upset about was the issue of why he called himself the Doctor. As I think has been established now (by @phaseshift ? sorry, I cannot remember) all the references to Doctor Who are just a blind to to the real question of why Doctor Who.
On the question of children he knows he has children (surely he has not forgotten his grand-daughter). Or does he? He was very cagey when Amy asked him if he had every had a child, and, unless I am mistaken, Susan never exhibited any overt characteristics of a Timelord, other than being quite clever for her age. Then again, back in Hartnell’s day, neither did the Doctor really. And, for what it is worth, Verity Lambert never wanted Susan to be his grand-daughter, but was forced to have it that way. (hmm, I wonder if that point will come up in An Adventure in Space and Time?)
I am sure I had a point at the beginning of this post, but for the moment it eludes me.
29 April 2013 at 09:51 #7135Just re-watched–“infinite” is rhetorical.
Episode still brilliant!
29 April 2013 at 05:10 #7122The board seems strangely quiet in the antipodes.
So…I think the logical consequence of seeing the Eye of Harmony in the Tardis is that there is only one Tardis. And, I suspect, only one Doctor.
Now, I know that this sweeps from the table some wonderful theories of multiple Tardises, and multiple Doctors and even evil ganger Doctors, or even Dalekised Doctors. But, the Journey to the Centre of the Tardis just made meel feel that this was not so.
Mysteries remain: Who is Clara? Who is the Doctor? Why does the Doctor call himself The Doctor? What is the relationship between the Doctor and Clara (ok, I know that was me slipping in my theory there), and when are we likely to see a return appearance of Dorium’s head? (never, I fear)
But are there multiple Tardii and multiple Doctors out there? I need to be convinced.
29 April 2013 at 02:39 #7116The Eye of Harmony. Not sure if this has been raised in the hundreds of posts that preceeded the showing of the episode in the colonies last night, but if the Eye of Harmony is in the Tardis, what effect did this have when the universe was re-booted? At last count, were not three Tardises being proposed in that event at one point on this board?
If there were (are?) multiple Tardises out there, are we assuming that only one (the real one) contains the Eye of Harmony?
I am sure this must have already been dealt with…
28 April 2013 at 23:51 #7107@chickenelly. I’m with you. I cannot understand why anyone would not like that episode. I thought it was a corker.
But like you, I need time to collect my thoughts and read all the posts. But a couple of prelimary reflections:
1. I am more convinced than ever that Clara is his (unearthly) child.
2. I am yet to be convinced that the Doctor will be revealed as dark. The Doctor remains the one constant for me. This is not to say that a dark version might appear (as it has in the past) but THE Doctor, I think, remains the moral core of the show.
Back later.
28 April 2013 at 10:23 #7013The episode just finished screening in the colonies. Have not read any of the comments yet.
But…
I…thought…that…was…BRILLIANT!
So much to take on. Brain exploding.
After much thought, and some sleep, will be back in a few hours.
27 April 2013 at 12:10 #6841It is late at night (here), the bottle from the Blenkinsop cellar has been finished, and bed calls. And yet…Caliburn House. I do not know if anyone has mentioned this before (apologies if so) but Caliburn was an early name for Excalibur. Not sure what to make of this…if anything…
27 April 2013 at 07:04 #6814@janetteb. Yes, there was something definitely amiss about the 1974 setting. Not only her clothes (the candles I put down to creating the atmosphere) but also the Professor’s age. It was 30 years after the war. When I was watching it, I could not help thinking: was he a commando and intelligence officer at the age of 15?
When I heard the Professor read out the date at the beginning, I (like most others, I suspect) focussed on the 25th of November. But in light of your suggestion, I am wondering if what we were meant to focus on was the year.
27 April 2013 at 02:54 #6807@scaryb. Alas, I suspect it is just thrown in, in the same way as references to “the 11th” are, but nevertheless, I will keep searching for something…anything…that happened on the 25th. What’s the point of a theory if it’s not bonkers?
27 April 2013 at 00:17 #6793@phaseshift and @bluesqueakpip. Oh dear. Just back from the shops and I think I may have been guilty of less than gentlemanly practice over on the Spoiler thread. Profuse apologies.
This is what comes from posting in the cold light of dawn with a clear head after one cup of coffee, instead of fortified by the free alcohol on the Qantas Club Lounge, or by a bottle from the Blenkinsop cellar at the end of the day.
Time to contain myself to the surer ground of bonkers theorising, of which the board is positively excelling at the moment!
Support for the theory that Clara may be the Doctor’s offspring. Hurrah!
Support for the theory that the fourth wall may be broken in the 50th special. Hurrah!
No support for the Kennedy theory. <Blenkinsop sulks>
26 April 2013 at 23:20 #6783@ardaraith. Umm…were not the children in The Snowmen Digby and Francesca?
26 April 2013 at 22:44 #6779Possible spoiler….
Just saw the synopsis for the Cyberman episode that seems to include new companions…
Their names sound a bit too cute for my tastes, but we shall see.
26 April 2013 at 21:31 #6761Breakfast time in the colonies, and have just read the night’s postings. Wow!
To adapt one of Benedict Cumberbatch’s best lines in Sherlock:
This blog is on fire!
26 April 2013 at 07:02 #669126 April 2013 at 00:13 #6688@ardaraith. Remember the subtitle of this blog: Theories even more insane than what’s actually happening. And this theory is both insane AND inspired. And brilliant to boot.
25 April 2013 at 22:12 #6685@juniperfish and @haveyoufedthefish. Yes! A theory to explain why Clara is the daughter of River and the Doctor! Excellent!
24 April 2013 at 07:34 #6562@janetteb nice idea. And it is strange that the action in Hide is identified As taking place on November 25. Strangely close to another date.
24 April 2013 at 07:05 #6560Just been re-watching the last two episodes, and the trailer for JttCotT and am struck by the way Clara is dressed. Very child-like (in comparison to Amy, who always dressed in a sassy and dangerously sexy way). Why the striking difference?
24 April 2013 at 05:13 #6553@whohar. The colonies are richer for your presence, and (as some would argue) my absence.
Now, I must see if there is life in the 4th wall theory yet. (Although the recent episodes provide little solace for me in that regard, I fear.) Perhaps the time has come to adapt, and I particularly like the recents posts that focus on the constant reference to ghosts, forests and libraries. Must ponder more.
-
AuthorPosts
