Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
12 July 2013 at 15:03 #13687
@Shazzbot – no problem. I always have a bit of difficulty explaining to people that the large paycheck I sometimes earn for a day’s work (I’ve done a few commercials) might well represent a year’s acting income. So I tend to be a bit … sensitive… on the topic.
👿
12 July 2013 at 14:27 #13681Nice paycheque for some.
@Shazzbot Carole, Frazer and Sylvester all worked for the BBC in the days when payment was strictly dependent on how often you’d worked for them before and the level of part you were playing. I suspect that they ended up being paid considerably less than the modern Doctors and Companions – and even considerably less than they’d have earned had Doctor Who been an ITV show.
Sylvester did once say that the original pay was relatively low, but the repeat fees were rather nice. 😉
12 July 2013 at 13:59 #13677I believe the convention circuit is sometimes nicknamed ‘The Doctor Who Pension Fund’. In this case it’s clearly ‘The Doctor Who Holiday Fund’. 🙂
Best of luck to them all, and I hope they enjoy the cruise (and don’t have to work too hard).
11 July 2013 at 00:12 #13592One of the things Moffat really enjoys doing in his scriptwriting is writing scenarios that don’t make sense from the revealed information – until finally, near the end of the story, you get a piece of information that allows you to retrospectively make sense of what’s just happened.
Amy and Rory’s break up is an example of that. It apparently doesn’t make sense – there’s a strong implication, in fact, that one of the reasons Rory’s angry is because it doesn’t make sense to him. It’s only near the end of the story that we find out why Amy feels their marriage has no future.
But then, we’ve never seen all of Amy and Rory’s lives. Just snapshots; unlike, say, Rose, Martha and Donna – where we saw them over a period of time that closely corresponded to real-world time. We don’t have the same kind of character development with Amy and Rory that we saw with Rose, Martha and Donna – because we’re not seeing them over a continuous period.
Davies is a novelist by temperament. He told his Who story via series long arcs, long-term character development, and kept tight control of his writers’ scripts. It’s natural to him to have a largish cast of regular characters who develop slowly and consistently over the space of several episodes.
Moffat has chosen to tell his Who story as a connected series of short stories. Whether he’s chosen this because he’s a natural short story writer, or whether it’s because he realised that the Doctor basically lives his life as a series of short stories, I don’t know.
So what we’ve seen are snapshots of Amy (and Rory) at certain times of their life. We’ve been told that the events of S5, S6 and S7 took place over – what, twenty two years? Anyway, the technique was set up in Eleventh Hour. Little Amelia. Jump, and we see grown-up Amy. Jump and we see Amy on the eve of her wedding.
What happened in between was for the viewer (or the Doctor?) to work out from hints, sometimes, and sometimes not. For example, we jump straight from Amy not being sure she wants to say Rory’s her boyfriend to her getting married to him tomorrow.
Snapshots. Short stories. Sometimes things are mentioned, sometimes they aren’t. Losing the baby was a big thing – but in real life you don’t announce every single day that you’re really torn up about your missing child. So in some short stories it isn’t mentioned. The near-divorce was a big thing – but the next time we see them, the reconciliation was probably a year ago. Why on earth would you go ‘do you remember that big row we had last year’?
This viewpoint is much more like the way the Doctor sees the universe, but it means the viewer has to do the same kind of ‘fill in the gaps’ work. And of course, we may not even be seeing the snapshots in the right order…
We’ve got a similar thing with Clara: the Eleventh clearly likes taking snapshots (quite literally, in Hide). He wants to check her out: he jumps from her parents meeting, to first date, to the baby Clara, to her childhood, to her mother’s death. From hints it appears that she travels with him on her days off; so she’s got this entire life he doesn’t really know that much about. As I pointed out way back when, for all the Doctor knows, Clara could have been adopted. His ‘snapshots’ include her as a baby, but he doesn’t see her parents in the hospital when she’s born.
If we usually see the Doctor from the Companion’s viewpoint, this series has been about seeing the Companions from the Doctor’s viewpoint. And this Doctor’s viewpoint is patchy.
10 July 2013 at 23:33 #13589@MadScientist72 – busily catching up on posts.
he implication is that he did stand and stare, and if he ran, it was what he saw there that made him run.
Hmm. It depends on the interpretation of the line; did he run away rather than look, or did he run away after looking? Similarly with the lines with Rose: he knows that looking into the Time Vortex can drive you mad – but is that because he’s looked, or because he knows what happened to the people who did?
Regarding the Valeyard thing – this has been discussed before; there are two continuities (which is why we all get so confused). One is what was said on TV. The other is what was said in the Target novelisation. They’re slightly different: the TV version has the Valeyard as a sort of Dream Lord made flesh, sometime around Doctor 13 and his final regeneration. The novelisation has the Valeyard as the Thirteenth Doctor.
The problem now is that we have been quite specifically told that both the GI and Clara have changed the continuities. So which one is now the correct version?
I think Bluey avoids the Next Doctor thread out of frustrated ennui at the protracted and pointless guessing
@Shazzbot – got it in one. Congratulations on your promotion, by the way. 😀
10 July 2013 at 22:53 #13587To take an example, the Proms, worthy and excellent though they are, pull in an audience of about 1.5 to 2 million, and they are all over TV, Radio and online like a rash for months beforehand.
The Proms are ‘cultural’. They involve ‘proper’ art. And also, frankly, the type of people who end up Controlling BBC1 and BBC TV often do go to classical concerts – or like people to think they do.
And the type of people who end up commissioning drama have often done English Literature degrees at universities where science fiction and children’s literature are notable for their complete absence from the syllabus. Doctor Who is, therefore, doubly not ‘cultural’. It’s science fiction and it’s for kids. Popular it may be, but there’s a little chorus running in the back of the head saying that it’s the sort of rubbish you’d only study at Liverpool John Moores. 🙂
10 July 2013 at 11:25 #13512to create a person-to-person connection between an actor/person and Kevin Bacon (or his roles/movies) in six connections or less.
Crewed on a stage play starring Gary Oldman (back before he went off to Hollywood), Gary Oldman worked with Kevin Bacon on Murder in the First. 😉
9 July 2013 at 12:36 #13431@craig, @phaseshift and @jimthefish – sorry, should have said which posts.
Copied or linked to (because they are discussing Talons as well as Amy/Rory): ~13403, 13407, 13410, 13424
Moved to Companions Past and Present: #13418, 13423, 13426, 13427.
Thank you.
9 July 2013 at 12:19 #13428@craig, @phaseshift, @jimthefish
This is a great discussion, but it’s definitely straying way beyond the boundaries of this thread. Could one of you move or copy the relevant posts over to the Companions Past and Present thread?
@nick – will be away from my computer for a bit now, so will reply to #13427 later.
9 July 2013 at 11:50 #13426After The Girl Who Waited why would there be a divorce? Why would Amy act so appallingly towards Rory?
@htpbdet – I have no idea whether it was from family experience or simply good writerly observation; but one of my friends described the ‘losing Melody’ arc (including the subsequent near-divorce) as being about a miscarriage. The whole thing – including the subsequent infertility nearly destroying the marriage – was utterly familiar to her.
So I suspect the problem was that it was so obvious to Moffat that he forgot to explain it enough. That is an area where After Gap Who suffers – but it’s also an area where we really see how we look to the Doctor. The view we get of Amy and Rory is pretty much the view he gets – a series of short stories, the exciting bits, with huge chunks of their life happening when he’s not around.
We will now return you to your normal discussion of Weng Chiang by asking whether Pre Gap Doctors had much more experience of normal human life. Discuss. 😀
9 July 2013 at 11:19 #13423Anything that doesn’t progress the narrative and, in effect, leaves it treading water is pretty much story padding.
@jimthefish – no, that’s unnecessarily strict. The normal rule is that any line that doesn’t EITHER
- Progress the narrative OR
- Progress the characterisation OR
- make the audience laugh
should be cut. The ideal line, of course, is one that does all three.
From the rest of your post, I’d say that you know perfectly well that ‘progressing the characterisation’ isn’t padding 😉
Would stories work as well without character progression? Nope – unless you’re writing an action-adventure. @nick – yes, you certainly could have had ‘The Girl Who Waited’ with a different set of characters. But it would’ve been a different story. And Amy would be a different person if you omitted the memory of Rory as her primary motivation. With Rory and Amy, Rory is the more obviously loving in relationship terms (which fits their respective personalities: Amy is assertive, easily angered and adventurous; Rory calm, caring, and domestic).
So it’s important to have stories where the audience is reminded that while Amy isn’t as demonstrative, her love for/need for Rory is as deep as his love for/need for her. Otherwise we won’t believe it when the time comes for them to leave: and they leave because Rory’s stuck and Amy – given the option – refuses to live without him.
In Pre-Gap Who, we wouldn’t have needed all this story arc for Amy and Rory, giving them a believable reason to leave the TARDIS. That’s not necessarily good – at the end of Leela’s story, for example, she leaves because she’s fallen in love with an entirely characterless Gallifreyan. In one scene, it appears, because both actors concerned were rather desperately searching through the scripts of that story to find anything, anything at all that would suggest that they had the slightest attraction to one another.
In After-Gap Who it’s admitted that travelling in the TARDIS is something so spectacular that Companions need a really good reason to leave. It’s either part of their arc (Amy won’t live without Rory, Martha’s family may be irritating, but she loves them more than she does the Doctor) or forced upon them by a catastrophic event (Rose, Donna).
Anyway, going back to Weng-Chiang – they definitely don’t need this episode to progress the narrative. At all. Because Holmes is a superb writer, he’s gone for ‘progressing characterisation’ – we find out a lot about Chang, Jago, Litefoot and Casey. It’s really the difference between a short story and a novella; he’s got more room to progress the characters, and he’s taken it.
9 July 2013 at 11:19 #13459Anything that doesn’t progress the narrative and, in effect, leaves it treading water is pretty much story padding.
@jimthefish – no, that’s unnecessarily strict. The normal rule is that any line that doesn’t EITHER
- Progress the narrative OR
- Progress the characterisation OR
- make the audience laugh
should be cut. The ideal line, of course, is one that does all three.
From the rest of your post, I’d say that you know perfectly well that ‘progressing the characterisation’ isn’t padding 😉
Would stories work as well without character progression? Nope – unless you’re writing an action-adventure. @nick – yes, you certainly could have had ‘The Girl Who Waited’ with a different set of characters. But it would’ve been a different story. And Amy would be a different person if you omitted the memory of Rory as her primary motivation. With Rory and Amy, Rory is the more obviously loving in relationship terms (which fits their respective personalities: Amy is assertive, easily angered and adventurous; Rory calm, caring, and domestic).
So it’s important to have stories where the audience is reminded that while Amy isn’t as demonstrative, her love for/need for Rory is as deep as his love for/need for her. Otherwise we won’t believe it when the time comes for them to leave: and they leave because Rory’s stuck and Amy – given the option – refuses to live without him.
In Pre-Gap Who, we wouldn’t have needed all this story arc for Amy and Rory, giving them a believable reason to leave the TARDIS. That’s not necessarily good – at the end of Leela’s story, for example, she leaves because she’s fallen in love with an entirely characterless Gallifreyan. In one scene, it appears, because both actors concerned were rather desperately searching through the scripts of that story to find anything, anything at all that would suggest that they had the slightest attraction to one another.
In After-Gap Who it’s admitted that travelling in the TARDIS is something so spectacular that Companions need a really good reason to leave. It’s either part of their arc (Amy won’t live without Rory, Martha’s family may be irritating, but she loves them more than she does the Doctor) or forced upon them by a catastrophic event (Rose, Donna).
Anyway, going back to Weng-Chiang – they definitely don’t need this episode to progress the narrative. At all. Because Holmes is a superb writer, he’s gone for ‘progressing characterisation’ – we find out a lot about Chang, Jago, Litefoot and Casey. It’s really the difference between a short story and a novella; he’s got more room to progress the characters, and he’s taken it.
9 July 2013 at 10:26 #13419@daler257 – it would probably help if you watched the 2005 episode ‘Dalek’.
8 July 2013 at 23:06 #13398and he has looked into the Time Vortex/Untempered Schism on more than once occasion,
When was that? He’s certainly travelled through the Time Vortex many times, but he’s not noted for looking at it. He has a very low opinion of travelling through the Time Vortex without a capsule. And he claims to have run away instead of looking into the Untempered Schism.
so his speaking about future events in the past tense shouldn’t be surprising.
If they happened in his personal past, yes. If they happen in his personal future, well. He’s a time-traveller. Talking about future events in the past tense is rather like those embarrassing moments when you mix up left and right, thus taking a turning going completely in the wrong direction – and having to travel halfway to Dunstable before you can get back onto the one-way system. 🙂
8 July 2013 at 20:39 #13385Who is going dressed as what?
No cosplay for me. It feels way too much like work. 🙂
I was also thinking that if @scaryb and I are coming back from the Friday session, and everyone else is travelling to London on the Friday evening, a Friday night meet up might be possible.
8 July 2013 at 18:28 #13382if I’d known it was going to be that difficult for you
@craig – to be fair, I don’t think any of us expected it to be that difficult. 😉
8 July 2013 at 18:02 #13379@scaryb – more likely they’ll be relaying the panellists onto a big screen – or they might put big plasma screens around the auditorium.
A 22 foot high Colin Baker. I may never recover. 😈
8 July 2013 at 17:33 #13376@scaryb – the on-site auditorium there can take 4000 people at a time, so I suspect that we’re looking at 8,000 tickets per day. It could be more: after all, the people coming in are an entire TV production team. They managed to convert one of the halls into a 10,000 seater sports arena for the Olympics.
I ended up doing Greenwich when I was being a Games Maker, but ExCel was one of my possible sites when I was training – they’d certainly have no problem handling 10,000 people per day, they’ve done bigger crowds.
8 July 2013 at 16:22 #13374@MadScientist72 – I cheerfully admit that it’s perfectly legal to marry your adopted granddaughter, but if he’s lying (and she’s lying) about Susan being his granddaughter – well, they’ve managed to be remarkably consistent about it for over 50 years of screen time and several centuries of Who time. 😀
8 July 2013 at 15:55 #13372One item from the audio commentary: David Tennant suggests River might be one of his future incarnations, and Steven Moffat points out that this would mean the Doctor fancies his future self.
Cue much laughter (lots of laughter on that commentary; what kind of coffee was that?) – and Steven Moffat seems to rather enjoy playing around with the idea that the Doctor would fancy his future female self.
8 July 2013 at 15:50 #13370@Shazzbot, @MadScientist72 – Of course, Rose being the new Doctor (having regenerated from Susan?) would mean that David Tennant’s 10.5 managed to marry his granddaughter.
I know Moffat can get a lot past the radar, but I really don’t think he can manage that one – the increasing evidence that Smith’s Doctor fancies Clara was one of the reasons I dropped ‘Clara is Susan/Susan’s daughter’ as one of my bonkers theories.
8 July 2013 at 14:42 #13365@juniperfish – fortunately, ‘my’ Doctor is Sylvester McCoy, who’s doing all three days.
But, erm, wow. Clearly they didn’t expect that many adults without children, but it’s equally clear that they did expect a pretty massive audience if they booked the Excel. But I wonder if they expected it to be quite that manic once sales opened?
8 July 2013 at 13:52 #13360@scaryb – phew!
That was a bit epic. Last time I had that much difficulty getting tickets, it was to see David Tennant and Patrick Stewart in Hamlet.
Though ironically, the extreme difficulty in getting them meant I had to go for my less preferred date there, as well – which turned out to be one of the performances before David Tennant’s back went and they had to cart him off on a stretcher. So in the end, not getting the date I wanted turned out to be the better deal.
🙂
8 July 2013 at 13:35 #13358@scaryb – Yup. Weeping Angels
8 July 2013 at 13:04 #13353Okay. So I’m going on Friday. Sorry not to meet up with all you guys, but maybe we can arrange something for Saturday evening?
7 July 2013 at 22:08 #13320@shazzbot Dog daycare services are about £22 to £30.
How are they on their own?
7 July 2013 at 20:55 #13313@shazzbot – dog walking service?
7 July 2013 at 20:00 #13304@scaryb – it’s been a long wait since 1896. Enjoy the champers! 🙂
7 July 2013 at 19:57 #13303@scaryb – have the link, thanks.
Are people trying for Saturday Weeping Angels? Followed by ‘anything we can lay our hands on’?
7 July 2013 at 13:59 #13297Here on what every other Brit would call a gorgeously hot and sunny day, I too feel the need to find a cool dark pub to hide out in.
@Shazzbot: You are not alone. I think it’s having spent formative years in a hot climate instead of having grown up in the true British spirit of: “Mummy, what’s that strange bright thing in the sky?”
I do dutifully tootle out for half an hour or so to get the Vitamin D dose, but I really want to be inside somewhere shady and cool. 🙂
6 July 2013 at 23:04 #13279Oh, and for those who enjoy the Confidential for each episode:
It’s here.
6 July 2013 at 22:07 #13278@wolfweed – Yes, it’s a bit difficult to recover from a corpse dropping out of your ‘death of a thousand cuts’ illusion.
The rat is looking more and more like Roland to me. But on the whole this is another good episode; while you can spot the padding, things are moving along. The cabinet is stolen by Weng Chiang, the laundry basket is explained (in the main hallway? In a Victorian house? Surely the laundry would have been taken into the servants’ quarters), Casey is murdered and Chang gets eaten. Oh, and we get to see a clip from The Good Old Days; but I’ll forgive them that – even Nu-Who has occasionally taken time out for a full scale musical number.
6 July 2013 at 21:59 #13277@phaseshift – it was a really terrifying cliff-hanger. Companion dead, everyone being chased by space-suit-zombie … arrgh!
One thing I did note was that – like Clara will later – River grabs the Doctor’s hand and drags him along. And riffing off @htpbdet‘s comment that Moffat originally hoped David Tennant would be in his first series, it seems clear that the Crash of the Byzantium was supposed to be an adventure with River and Ten – which explains why she’s so surprised he doesn’t know her, when we now know this story as the only time she sees that particular incarnation.
Unless it turns out that they sneaked a couple of scenes with Alex Kingston and David Tennant into the 50th, when filming for Name.
Yes, Catherine Tate was brilliant in her full run at Donna Noble. Again, I now wonder whether her heartbreaking, disastrous end to her time with the Doctor has just been retconned as part of the interference by the Great Intelligence. In which case, did Clara somehow manage to save Donna’s life, if not her memories? Or have things been changed from what we saw?
The Vashta Nerada. Brilliantly simple concept. Our fear of the dark is perfectly sensible. There really are monsters out there.
6 July 2013 at 19:28 #13269Why do you think the Master must know everything the Doctor has ever done?
@htpbdet – I didn’t think I’d said that. I was thinking that, if there is a Doctor Zero, he must be pre-Hartnell. The Master and the Doctor were on Gallifrey together throughout their joint schooldays – if there were a Doctor Zero, the Master would know.
Though your nephews have got the one possibility where people might not know; regeneration as a baby and subsequent adoption. The Master might not know his former friend was adopted.
As to the Time War – it is a period where we have it on tape, so to speak, that the Master definitely didn’t know anything beyond what he was told by David Tennant’s Doctor. And we’re talking about periods where we can shoehorn in an extra incarnation of the Doctor.
Incidentally, ‘he’s the one who broke the promise’ does NOT work equally well with the future. I’m sorry, but English has a perfectly good tense for that: ‘he’s the one who’ll break the promise.’ And when does the Smith Doctor have time in his timeline to go finding out about his future self? He’s busy doing voice-overs and chucking leaves about and calling Clara to him. 🙂
Ah, hospital pain-killers. When I went in for my somewhat-in-a-hurry operation, I remember explaining that the last time I’d gone under general anaesthetic (as a child), I’d thrown up over three different kidney bowls and (I think) about half the bed. Oh, ho, they said, anaesthetics have moved on since then.
My next memory was woozily coming round outside the operating theatre, throwing up, and hearing the words ‘I’m sorry, we’ve tried everything we’ve got’ (which really wasn’t the sort of thing you want to hear in those circumstances). Then I slipped off to sleep again. Then I woke up again (and threw up), and tried to go back to sleep again – only there was this really irritating nurse who kept insisting that I breathe…
I found out later that I’d had an allergic reaction to the anaesthetic which had been complicated by the painkillers. What should have been a perfectly normal dose had become an overdose, and I’d stopped breathing. What I remembered was the part where I’d started breathing on my own again – but only when conscious.
Funnily enough, the ward nurse couldn’t understand why, for the rest of my stay, I didn’t want the full dose of painkillers…
Take care, don’t worry about being woozy, and look after yourself. 😉
6 July 2013 at 18:37 #13268Sorry if I annoyed you, @Shazzbot, but to my mind, discussing (or joking about) who would be the worst possible choice for the 12th Doctor is simply the other side of the ‘discussing the next Doctor’ coin.
Who would you like, who would you hate? Same conversation.
6 July 2013 at 18:33 #13267It eats you, starting with your bottom… oops, no, sorry. Wrong fandom.
The obvious Moffat theme in this episode is that it’s the first time we see River Song, her TARDIS diary, the Doctor’s ‘sweetie’ nickname and her catchphrase of ‘Spoilers!’. So we’ve gone through the beginnings of an arc, here. With the exception of Blink, the Moffat stories have discussed whether the Doctor ‘dances’, shown him fancying a girl in a relationship cut short by death (Girl in the Fireplace), and now we’re onto a relationship that’s also cut short by death – but because he’s a time-traveller, death isn’t the end. The strong implication (which we now know to be true) is that the future Doctor is going to get married; River’s his wife.
From having forgotten how to ‘dance’, to re-starting the dating game, to meeting the person you’re going to marry. That’s the Doctor’s arc, in Moffat’s eyes. He’s coming back to life.
Slightly less obvious themes: the ‘timey-wimey’ is mainly tied up with River, but it’s still there. Not just because she knows the Doctor well – and he doesn’t know her at all. But also, for example, because River’s obviously puzzled when Donna ‘dies’. She knows, clearly, that Donna didn’t die at the Library. So how can she be dead?
‘It doesn’t do wood’. As far as I know, this episode is the first time that running gag about the sonic screwdriver appears.
The Vashta Nerada are another monster that are just looking for lunch; however they managed to hit pretty high on my ‘creepy’ factor when they took over the spacesuit and made it chase after everyone. We also get another Moffat theme here; the repeated catchphrase. Proper Dave is dead; but his electronic ghost is stuck in a loop, repeating and repeating some of his last words. Similarly, Jamie in The Empty Child can only repeat his last thoughts – is his ‘sister’ really his Mummy?
6 July 2013 at 16:04 #13261Noooo…. please…. can we keep ALL discussion about the next Doctor to The Next Doctors thread.
It’s driving me mad. Mad, I tell you! Any minute now, I will start developing my plan for the complete destruction … of reality… ITSELF!
I’m now going to watch Silence in the Library and see lots of people get eaten alive. It will be very soothing.
😈
5 July 2013 at 23:40 #13236@htpbdet – one of the problems with him being Doctor Zero is that the Master would have known Doctor Zero. It is also very likely that the Master would know why Doctor Zero ‘broke the promise’.
Now, this is a wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey thing, in that the Master can’t know, because Moffat wouldn’t have written it yet. 🙂 But we’re still looking at a situation where there is indeed one period of the Doctor’s life that the Master canonically doesn’t know anything about. He doesn’t know about the later stages of the Time War. He had no idea that the Time Lords were gone, and he had no idea they were now madder than he was.
And if the Hurt Doctor ‘broke the promise’ during that period, then the Master would not know about it, and there is no problem about his never referring to it.
I admit that Hurt Doctor might be a future Doctor who came back into his own timeline and did something the Smith Doctor knows about (so that he refers to ‘broke the promise’ in the past tense, because a previous incarnation saw what his future self will do). But we’ve been here before. So long as we don’t get Colin Baker back, all is well. But the two important points to me are:
1. The Smith Doctor seems to know exactly who the Hurt Doctor is. Yet, in The Next Doctor, the Tennant Doctor appears initially uncertain whether Jackson Lake might be a future self. The implication is that the Doctor doesn’t know the appearance of his future selves until he meets them.
2. The tenses change within the line. That’s only natural if you are changing your thoughts from your present (keep the promise) to your past (broke the promise).
5 July 2013 at 22:57 #13233To launch the series into the next fifty years, what would be best? An effective restart? Or a return to the mystery that started the travels in the first place?
@htpbdet Both.
It would be possible to re-visit the Time War, the mystery that started the Hartnell Doctor’s travels, and do an effective restart. Providing Moffat has found some way of connecting all three.
And we already know that Moffat’s found a way of connecting all three. He’s sent the Doctor into his own time-line; the one that travels from Gallifrey to Trenzalore. Does the start of that mystery on Gallifrey lead to the Hurt Doctor’s actions in the Time War? Was it the actions of the Hurt Doctor that led to there being no Doctors beyond Eleven in the time line?
I’d point out, if you want me to dwell on tenses, that you are omitting lines. (Though in fairness, I probably have better access to the recording of Name of the Doctor right now.)
Doctor: The name you choose, it’s like a promise you make. He’s the one who broke the promise.
The emphasis is mine: the tense changes. From referring to himself in the present, the Doctor changes tense to refer to something in the past. The Hurt Doctor isn’t the one who breaks the promise, or will break the promise. He’s the one who broke it.
Good to see you back. 🙂
5 July 2013 at 12:53 #13202@janetteb – I believe that what they actually feed Matt is spongecake with a breadcrumb coating, shaped like fish fingers. 😀
5 July 2013 at 01:24 #13196Iain Banks now has a memorial asteroid.
4 July 2013 at 23:36 #13195I also didn’t know there was a fan bid to boycott Star Cops. I’d have been fairly annoyed – I met Trevor Cooper when we were both working at the Royal Exchange Theatre in Manchester. He was one of the actors, I was doing crew.
But yes, a fine example of ARSE. Let’s try and kill off any chance of decent science fiction programmes on telly, because of course that’ll help out Doctor Who…
4 July 2013 at 22:38 #13188It kind of depends on whether there’s a meltdown when ticket sales open. Will more people want Saturday than there are tickets available?
4 July 2013 at 21:48 #13180@craig -Well, if they do plan to charge extra for the screening – when I say I’m close to the Excel, I mean I’m about half an hour away by public transport. So getting back to my place, from the Excel, to watch the telly is a feasible proposition. Other propositions are not available. 😈
Advantage of Saturday: Tom Baker’s there, the screening may be included in the price.
Advantage of Friday: fewer families, probably less crowded.
Advantage of Sunday: the day after the 50th has been screened, so we could all talk it over.
4 July 2013 at 21:10 #13177::starts measuring kitchen to see if more sleeping space could be made available::
😉
4 July 2013 at 19:51 #13171Unless they’re donating it to charity.
I suspect the charities concerned will be The Doctor Who Pension Fund and The Doctor Who Fund For Interesting But Low Paid Creative Work – that is, the fees will be going to the performers.
@scaryb and @Shazzbot – I live in a studio flat, okay? I don’t even have room for a sofa to hide behind 🙂
So it’s not so much ‘spare room’ as ‘spare floor’. 😀
4 July 2013 at 13:29 #13156I’m glad I couldn’t find prices either.
It looks very good – and fortunately I’m close enough to the Excel that I don’t need to worry about hotels – but yeah, it worries me that they’re not stating the price yet.
3 July 2013 at 15:04 #13118And as The Doctor points out his ‘British Royals I Spy Card’, Charles admits that the Royal Family have an ‘Incarnations of the Doctor’ one – and he’s just scored Eleven points over Mum.
1 July 2013 at 23:22 #13072Planet of the Dead is fine for a story which had to be somewhat rewritten at the last second – due to the bus being smashed nearly to bits. Then they had a bit of a sand-storm…
All in all, Planet of the Dead sounds a bit like The Greatest Show in the Galaxy; the most amazing thing about the episode is that they managed to finish the thing 🙂
For those who want to watch the Confidential:
1 July 2013 at 22:23 #13066@jimthefish – yes, the Easter Egg is an Easter Egg. It’s in Scene Selection – go to the scene entitled ‘Keep Looking’ and then go up instead of down. ‘Blink’ will be highlighted – select it, and it takes you into the Easter Egg video.
@Shazzbot – horses for courses, no doubt. I don’t find moving statues scary. Put it down to reading The Enchanted Castle at an impressionable age; or possibly blame my Aunt, who lived next to a graveyard (well, somebody has to).
Though, if you have to point to another episode to show how scary the original Angels are, I think it rather supports my point 👿
-
AuthorPosts
