Forum Replies Created
4 February 2013 at 22:30 #2389
Ooh, I remember the photographs one. The ending was terrifying – I was nervous of cameras for weeks afterwards.
Thankfully, I got over it.
The final series also had quite the downer finale.4 February 2013 at 00:14 #2369
I’d agree pretty much with @jimthefish – I’m not thinking in terms of a complete reset of the Whoniverse. I’m thinking of ‘The Doctor’ being reset to ‘Doctor Who?’
In his own mind, as much as in the minds of all his enemies. Because, you know, this is a guy who can scare a mighty space fleet, just by himself. The whole thing is set up in The Eleventh Hour. “Hello, I’m The Doctor. Basically, run.” -and they do.
From a storytelling point of view, having a hero that can now make entire armies wonder where the loo is just by saying his name is a bit of a problem. And I think Moffat’s gift to future producers, his 50th Anniversary Present (if you like), might be to solve that problem. By pressing The Doctor’s reset button, so he again becomes the mad man with the box, exploring a universe that’s become new. Again.
Because it might be ‘again’. Since I’m in the Doctor Who memories bit, I have to say that ‘my’ Doctor is Sylvester McCoy (in his second and third series, not the excreable first). He was dangerous. He was manipulative. And there was a strong hint that there was more to him than he understood himself. Remembrance of the Daleks will always live in my memory as the story when I thought: ‘they’ve done it, they’ve done it, they’ve found their way back to what Doctor Who should be’.
Of course, what I didn’t know was that by that time, the BBC were determined to cancel the show anyway. But I do think that without McCoy’s last two series, Who would never have been brought back.
Returning to the ‘reset’ button; watching The Doctor’s Wife last night, I was struck again by that closed circle on The Corsair’s arm; the Ouroboros, the cycle that begins anew as soon as it ends. Then we’ve got the Easter theme (death and rebirth, again) and eggs.
Thing about eggs is, they hatch. And a cute fluffy little chick pops out. Awww…
And I wonder; how many times has the Doctor done this? Have we been watching just one cycle? He thinks he’s a Time Lord, the Time Lords think he’s a Time Lord – but is that who he really is? And when things are old, and he’s done everything, and everyone knows him – does he start again? Back to the Unknown Wanderer, travelling the universe?
Anyway, a genuinely funny turn-up would be if the Doctor really does get reborn – as a baby – and gets taken back in time by River to be the baby boy we know the Ponds adopt in the 1940’s US. It would certainly help explain why Rory must die in New York 🙂3 February 2013 at 13:05 #2345
Downtime – I’d point out that this was the story that introduced the Brigadier’s daughter, Kate Lethbridge-Stewart. And of course, we saw her in the first part of the series.1 February 2013 at 13:14 #2259
I had to research this (well, I didn’t have to – I managed to con my way into researching 1960’s TV science fiction) for my degree.
It wasn’t just the time, it was the point that – in the very early days of recording TV – the editing cost a fortune. It was far cheaper to make Hartnell’s fluffs part of the Doctor’s character. And the actors were all stage trained anyway; someone fluffs a line – you just carry on if it’s at all possible.
Alas, I never saw Patrick Troughton ‘live’. Given my age I should have done, but this was the point in my life when – courtesy HM Govt – I was adding to my life experience by being a child in both fascist and communist dictatorships. By the time I was back in the UK for school Patrick Troughton had become Jon Pertwee.
Years later I saw Tomb of the Cybermen; I’m rather sorry I missed him.31 January 2013 at 12:13 #2229
@janetteb – no, Jessica Raine was interviewed in Radio Times last week (or maybe the week before) and she is quite definitely in Doctor Who. She’s already filmed it. She was talking about how different it is from Call The Midwife.
Not the same episode as David Warner, thankfully, or the fourth-wall theorists really would be going into orbit. :0)30 January 2013 at 21:11 #2159
@chickenelly – I take it you’re a TV girl? As @IAmNotAFishIAmAFreeMan said, there’s been no problem with Tennant’s career post Who. RSC, West End, lead in some pretty good short telly, and soon to play Richard II (RSC, again). I should have such a career…
Keep in mind that the real reason he was after a US series was the money. A successful run in one of those and you can set up your own damn Shakespeare company. 🙂30 January 2013 at 14:50 #2141
Hasn’t Smith said that he’ll be doing the Christmas Special though? That would suggest that he’s still the Doc post the anniversary special. Of course, that could be just another piece of cunning misdirection.
Smith has said that, and he might well be even if he has regenerated. We’ve already seen holograms (emergency protocols), we’ve seen the Doctor leaving other people recordings (the Tenth). And then there’s flashbacks.
Or, given that this is a time traveller we’re talking about, actual visits to the Eleventh’s timeline.
And it’s been very, very carefully established that River can pilot the TARDIS. Without the Doctor. In fact, better than the Doctor.
From a career point of view, if you did want a surprise regeneration, you’d need to try and keep Matt Smith employed until very shortly before November 23rd. Otherwise, he’s losing months of work at a moment where he’s likely to be at his most sought-after – an available ‘A’ list actor.30 January 2013 at 14:07 #2137
It might simply be because I have always seen him play villians which, given Hartnell’s history might well have influenced the producers to select him.
Almost certainly. It means David Bradley will have exactly the same problem in the eyes of modern viewers that William Hartnell did in the 1960’s. Bradley will have to convince modern viewers that he can play the Doctor – just as Hartnell had to convince his audience that he was a crotchety old time traveller.
It’s a brilliant piece of casting – and potentially very good for Bradley’s career, because it’ll show he’s also got a wider range. No wonder he nearly bit Mark Gatiss’s hand off, when he was asked if he was interested.30 January 2013 at 13:53 #2135
To be honest, I think the break was for accounting purposes. The BBC spent a fortune on the Olympics/Jubilee etc, and they were, I suspect, hugely relieved when it was suggested that S7 could partly air in 2013.
That said, an evil thought’s just occurred to me, regarding the oft-suggested MadTheory that Smith’s Doctor might regenerate at the 50th.
If they do another split series, that means Matt Smith will still be filming for the first part of S8. They won’t have to bring the new Doctor in until they start filming the Special.
Filming for the Christmas Special is usually around August/Sept/November. Now if the Special is ‘the hunt for the Doctor’ and they only need their new Doctor for a couple of scenes… he/she could come in for filming after November 23rd. If they split the two filming blocks, and use the excuse that they’re so busy with anniversary filming.
…hmmm. Y’know, it’s just about do-able. >:)30 January 2013 at 11:22 #2123
Given that the Anniversary is the date of the first ever episode, it could be that they’ve decided that the Anniversary Special is the start of S8. That would explain why they’re filming the Special first.
Or it could just be availability thingies. They can and do film out of order; might be February was when the needed actors were available.30 January 2013 at 11:14 #2121
This idea’s been floated before, but maybe the Doctor is Omega? Though hopefully without the rice krispies 🙂30 January 2013 at 10:51 #2115
Bradley’s also an excellent choice because – like Hartnell – he’s best known for his hard guy roles. (As indeed, he played in Dinosaurs on a Space Ship).
But I don’t think Bradley will turn up as the first Doctor during the 2013 series – unless they do some hand wavy stuff about Soloman being a double. I know they recast Colin Baker, but not within the season! I think they’ll cast one actor for the documentary, and one for the surprise appearance of the first Doctor.
Or, given Steven Moffat’s love of things that only become clear at the end of the story, they’ll cast someone who will turn out in the anniversary special to have been the first Doctor all along.29 January 2013 at 22:04 #2095
Not just David Warner’s character. Have you noticed the name given for James Norton’s character?28 January 2013 at 21:08 #2053
The implication seems to be that there’s two factions of Clerics, though. One faction kidnaps baby Melody and is trying to destroy the Doctor. The other is willing to work with the Doctor.
They do have different shoulder flashes and insignia.28 January 2013 at 19:03 #2045
Omega is also a Christian symbol – I remember having quite a debate about whether their Omega symbol included a stylised Alpha. Alpha and Omega would mean – quite possibly – a sneaky little hint, but it would also be a standard vaguely Christian Cleric symbol. Alpha and Omega together mean ‘the beginning and the end’.
Omega by itself means ‘the end’.27 January 2013 at 23:04 #2027
I still think we’ll see a dramatic reboot of some kind
Agreed. There’s nothing I can put my finger on, but it just feels like we’re about to start over.
The very first episode of Moffat’s tenure was called ‘The Eleventh Hour’. Eleventh Hour? Not much time left?
And then there’s Easter. All those eggs. The Doctor dies – only he doesn’t die, it’s a trick. But the whole point with the real Easter is death-and-rebirth (all those eggs).
And he’s circling round: one thing we know about the Doctor before we first see him is that he’s managed to produce a granddaughter. And for the first time in the Who cycle, we see the Doctor with an actual wife and family, the way he must have been before Totter’s Yard. Repeating the circle.
One of the arc phrases for Moffat’s scripts: ‘everybody dies’. River dies. Rory and Amy dies. Clara won’t stop dying. Only the Doctor has tricked his way out of it. But how long can he keep running?27 January 2013 at 19:37 #2021
I think Moffat’s idea is that everything we think we know about the Doctor is wrong. There’s so many doubles, and gangers, and mirrors wandering around; not only is the Doctor not who we think he is, he’s not who he thinks he is.
Doctor Who? The question that must not be answered; because the Doctor himself mustn’t find out who he really is…27 January 2013 at 19:05 #2013
No, both Joy and the guys at the beginning of the Snowmen do have a bigger purpose than a joke. They’re establishing for the audience that these are not nice aliens.
In a sense, the Silence may have a point about the Doctor – he’s genocidal. But since we see a Silence kill someone for just the fun of it (‘Why did you kill her?’ ‘Joy’), we know they’re the worse option.
Similarly with the snowmen – if we didn’t see them kill people, we wouldn’t know they were dangerous. Basically, all they do for the rest of the episode is stand around and look menacing.27 January 2013 at 16:48 #2001
Alex Kingston’s acting was one of the things I noticed when I rewatched. She did a brilliant job – first time, when I didn’t know the ending, she looked to be reacting naturally. Second time, when you know the ending, you can see how much River’s character is controlling things.
She keeps Amy away from the Tessalecta Doctor, comes up with a quick explanation about why the Doctor’s body needs to be incinerated and stops Rory and Amy from blurting everything out to younger Doctor. One of the things that fooled me the first time is that River does appear genuinely upset – but when you think that Amy and Rory are her parents, it becomes clear. She’s upset because she knows how much this is going to hurt her parents – and she can’t tell them anything. Yet.
No wonder she gives the Doctor that whacking great slap.27 January 2013 at 13:37 #1975
It sounds rather like the interview consisted of:
Interviewer: I’d like to ask you about Doctor Who.
JLC: I’m contractually required to say nothing at all about Doctor Who.
Interviewer: Errr, errr….25 January 2013 at 16:33 #1915
They broadcast the start of S6 on Easter weekend, and dated it as taking place on the Good Friday. And then they killed the Doctor… the Doctor various people believed was a god…
So yeah, if they’ve brought it forward, that sounds like someone looked at the BBC’s schedule and said ‘err, it’s important it broadcasts at Easter, because we’ve got references to Easter in the script’.24 January 2013 at 15:40 #1863
It’s always been my thought that while the most likely mental illness for humans is depression, the most likely mental illness for a Time Lord is megalomania.
They all seem to get it sooner or later. Even the Doctor’s had his moments. If the ‘twin Doctor’s’ theory turns out to be correct, I confidently expect the second Doctor to be a complete megalomaniac. 🙂21 January 2013 at 22:41 #1805
@phaseshift – almost certainly, though I couldn’t specify exactly which one. Not after five hours on a coach, anyway 🙂
The ‘blue’ police box is now copyright the BBC, isn’t it?21 January 2013 at 21:27 #1799
Funnily enough, I remember travelling on a coach up to Glasgow, and we passed one of the very last Police Boxes. To the great excitement of one small boy, who was leaping up and down on his seat, yelling ” Mummy, Mummy, it’s the Tardis! Mummy, IT’S THE TARDIS!”
The thing I most remember is an entire coach-load of adults smiling. And that no one, absolutely no one on that coach told that little boy ‘no, it isn’t’.20 January 2013 at 17:22 #1785
Yes, I noticed that the Victorian costume was closing in on Hartnell’s Edwardian costume. A ‘back to the beginning’ reboot is looking more and more likely…19 January 2013 at 18:29 #1757
@jimthefish – yes, I’d agree. I think the show had the most brilliant opening; we started with the audience seeing the most important event in the Doctor’s life, the one that changed everything for him. Ian and Barbara following Susan home, and his decision to kidnap them. This is what changed ‘the Doctor’ into ‘Doctor Who’.
And if you think of ‘the Doctor’ as possibly someone capable of becoming a Timelord like ‘the Master’, you can see how important that meeting may have been.
One of the things I’d love is for the 50th to refer back to that in some way, but maybe it’s always going to be a mystery. Why was the Doctor was so scared of discovery that he was willing to take these two apes with him? Rather than risk them talking about him.19 January 2013 at 16:40 #1743
Why do the movie-makers feel they have to give him a human heritage?
I’d guess it was the standard film-script advice – you need someone that your audience can identify with. Since most of the audience won’t be aliens, better to make Doctor Who a human scientist.
The TV version was startlingly brave for the time; the central character isn’t from our time or our planet. And later we find he isn’t even human. Contrast this with Star Trek, where the central character is from future-Iowa and the ‘alien’ on the bridge is half-human.19 January 2013 at 16:16 #1737
The thing you have to remember about the films: no TV repeats back in them days. So they didn’t bother too much about the TV version beyond borrowing the basic scenario. Though, even as a kid, I always found Invasion Earth tons better than Doctor Who and the Daleks.
There is a story that when they gave Bernard Cribbins his ‘wrap’ present for The End of Time, they gave him a picture of him playing Special Constable Tom Campbell back in 1966 – side-by-side with a picture of him playing Wilfred Mott in 2009. It was captioned ‘The Most Faithful Companion’.19 January 2013 at 01:35 #1697
Yes, @scaryb, you’re right. Clara was entertainment officer on the Alaska.
aaand another thing before I trot off to bed:
from Time of Angels: “What if we had ideas that could think for themselves; what if one day, our dreams no longer needed us? When these things occur and are held to be true the time will be upon us. The time of angels.”
From The Snowmen: “He dreamed you. How can you still exist?”
“Now the dream outlives the dreamer and can never die. Once I was the puppet, now I pull the strings.”
It occurs to me that one dream that has certainly outlived the dreamer is Doctor Who. And possibly the Doctor himself, in-universe, is another ‘dream that outlived the dreamer’.18 January 2013 at 23:52 #1691
Oh, and in keeping with the ‘mirroring’ theme: Clara’s “It’s smaller on the outside” is a mirror-image of the normal “It’s bigger on the inside”.18 January 2013 at 23:17 #1689
Anyway, whilst rewatching the episode (must be all the snow) I took the opportunity to pause on that newspaper.
As well as the reference to a 1930’s/1940’s Japanese Prime Minister, there’s also a reference to Prague, Jews, fascists and Germany. This also places the other article within WW2 (or just before).
And on the right hand side there’s an obviously faked article – you can see that the paragraph repeats.
It appears to be a story about the shrimp pickers dance – which would suggest the US. The visible names are Joseph Sumption, possibly a Mr Frye, Wrangell (Alaska), and Old Cy Lent.
I dunno if the other names have any significance, but ‘Cy Lent’ is definitely a teaser.15 January 2013 at 20:34 #1461
You’re doing great, Craig. 😀
The forum I help out on quite deliberately selected a database (sql and php) format rather than the standard forum software. Essentially, while we also have a lot of brief conversations, it’s extremely easy to link from one conversation to another. It’s also possible to switch a post from topic A to topic B – or even decide that this post belongs in topic A, B, and C – and cross reference it so it will show up in all those topics.
So we can start a thread on Doctor Who S7, wander on to general Moffatdom and end up on Sherlock – and it doesn’t matter. One of my jobs is switching things into the right conversation; I just go in and relabel the posts, cross referencing if it’s obvious one post is talking about Doctor Who AND Sherlock. I suppose the question I’d ask from experience of a very wide-ranging conversation is: is there a way for the mods to link between threads or even move posts over?
The main board is chronologically based; you’ve got the equivalent with the recent post sidebar.
Hope this is some help14 January 2013 at 15:53 #1427
I think that this season was the one where Moffat either wasn’t entirely sure he’d keep the job, or knew he had to grab his audience for his new Doctor. So he did a season that mirrors the lead up to the 50th, but was self-contained within the one season.
Every series since has been part of the lead-up to the 50th – which is why it hasn’t felt quite so great. We’re still only part-way through the story.
But yeah, there’s more to this story than first appears. The disruptions in time mirror the cracks in the universe, that ruddy spaceship and the identity of the pilot is never explained. And while they certainly reused built sets, they usually repainted/redressed to make it look different.
And the perception filter is big. Again. There’s a perception filter and everyone’s missing what’s in front of their nose.
But the chief joy of this episode is that it’s simply charming. The Doctor is a hilarious fish out of water, James Corden and Daisy Haggard play their love story beautifully, and the football fits seamlessly into the episode.12 January 2013 at 21:19 #1319
Just been rewatching The Lodger. The big thing that stands out from the pov of the 50th Anniversary is “somebody’s trying to build a TARDIS”, which is causing disruptions in time. Later we find out that the spaceship may have been connected to the Silence – but we still haven’t gone into the time travel element that was hinted at.
The other thing is the subtle little references to previous regenerations. There’s the Doctor/Craig head-butt transfer, of course, but also ‘nine’ is bad (on the TARDIS screen) and ‘five’ is better. The Eleventh Doctor reprises the Third’s shower scene. And the teapot is a Charles and Di wedding teapot, date 1981, same year as the first (brief) appearance of Peter Davison as the Fifth Doctor.
Previous Doctors. The further back you go in the regeneration number sequence, the better it is (Amy eventually ends up with ‘minus three’ when everything is resolved). And while the teapot isn’t anachronistic as such, it’s interesting to spot in light of the definitely anachronistic Japanese PM in The Snowmen.
Remember Rory’s ID badge? The one we were firmly informed was a production mistake when the entire web spotted it? The props department seems to be making an awful lot of these kind of mistakes.11 January 2013 at 20:41 #1239
So, anyway, I rewatched this on the repeat.
The portrayal of depression is very powerful, but for me the best thing about the episode was the explanation of Van Gogh’s work. Who he was, why he was important in art, and – especially in the Starry Night scene – what he was trying to show in his art. You can also see that the set and props people had gone to town, lovingly recreating the various pictures.
I have a bit of a problem with depth perception, so I don’t really ‘get’ paintings. It’s not that I can’t see them; it’s just that they might as well be wallpaper. Unless a picture tells a story, it’s just a pretty picture and I have absolutely no idea why people rave about, say, Sunflowers. So it was fantastic to have an explanation in child-friendly language. Oh, okay, he was trying to get the way they’re both living and dying at the same time. And he used lots of colour, because he saw the world as full of colour – it almost talked to him. And the animation of ‘Starry Night’ was excellent.
So I would rate this as the best of the ‘Doctor meets famous historical person’ episodes, in that it went back to the old Hartnell style of trying to be a bit educational.9 January 2013 at 13:18 #1019
Clearly acting with all those kids in Single Father made him extremely broody…9 January 2013 at 00:12 #961
Ten’s been quoted all over the place as saying he has no comment at all on the 50th show – so in the best Yes Minister tradition I take that as meaning he’s definitely in it!
There’s certainly a current joke that if an actor says they’re working on a project they can’t talk about – they’re in Doctor Who.8 January 2013 at 23:01 #933
Unless she’s both a representation of ‘Doctor Who’ and a mirror of ‘The Doctor’ (who isn’t yet ‘Doctor Who’). In which case, she’s got eight to ten regenerations to go. 🙂
Which makes me wonder if the 50th is about ‘The Doctor’ becoming ‘Doctor Who’.8 January 2013 at 22:55 #931
Given Luke’s ability to walk straight into any weirdness going, I suspect K-9 mk 4 is kept very busy indeed.8 January 2013 at 22:53 #929
Agreed. Given that it’s now thirty years since Tom Baker played the role, it realistically isn’t possible to have him on screen without some extensive phlebotinum to explain why the Fourth Doctor suddenly looks like he’s in his late seventies. They just about got away with it for Peter Davison, but he’s twenty years younger than Tom Baker.
On the other hand, a lot of the surviving actors who played the Doctor have been very happily occupied (in-between other work) doing audio stories for Big Finish. Vocally, there’s no problem.
So if we are to have all the incarnations, I’ll go with you @blenkinsopthebrave – it’s either going to be still photos again (reprising Eleven’s entrance in The Eleventh Hour – possibly coming full circle as Eleven’s exit?) or they’ll have them as Out of Shot or Voice Over.8 January 2013 at 22:36 #911
Talking about the Doctor’s most constant companion (aka Sexy); I’ve often wondered (usually whenever listening to the song) whether they played the Muse song ‘Supermassive Black Hole’ instead of ‘Starlight’ because ‘Starlight’ gives away far too much.
This ship is taking me far away
Far away from the memories
Of the people who care if I live or die
I will be chasing the starlight
Until the end of my life
I don’t know if it’s worth it anymore
Hold you in my arms
I just wanted to hold
You in my arms
You electrify my life
Let’s conspire to ignite
All the souls that would die just to feel alive
But I’ll never let you go
If you promised not to fade away
Never fade away
Our hopes and expectations
Black holes and revelations
Our hopes and expectations
Black holes and revelations
Hold you in my arms
I just wanted to hold
You in my arms
The Doctor and the TARDIS? Or the Doctor and his companions? Discuss.8 January 2013 at 11:44 #749
Searchability on Google tends to grow with a) number of posts and b) the linkages to other sites.
I’m a frequent poster-and-technical-assistant on another smallish site (Joss Whedon based, though for some reason we discuss Steven Moffat’s shows a lot 🙂 ) and that has now migrated to top of the list if you search for it by name.
So I wouldn’t worry too much about being way down the lists when we’re less than ten days old.8 January 2013 at 09:44 #723
The prop-maker isn’t going to go to all the bother of mocking up a newspaper page from 1890s and then reference a completely different period for the other story.
When I was looking up the relevant Prime Ministers, I thought ‘there’s no way this can be a mistake’. The names are utterly different, and Karoe Fumimaro would’ve been aged one in 1892. Plus, it’s unlikely a report from an 1930’s paper would look the same as an 1892 paper – not to a prop maker.7 January 2013 at 23:47 #689
It reminds me of The Wedding of River Song; you know, when all the times have collapsed together because breaking the fixed point broke time?
So the Japanese PM of 1941 is co-existing with 1892. Hmmm… those dates are 49 years apart.
The Bloomsbury Lane is a bit of a joke – Bloomsbury’s chokka with universities, the British Museum, SOAS etc. In the late Victorian/Edwardian era all self-respecting intelligences hung out in Bloomsbury (especially Great ones).
Sadly, the N31 bus doesn’t go through there, though. It stops at Camden Town.7 January 2013 at 22:40 #673
@juniperfish – we’ll just have to agree to differ. 😀 It’s probably because I’ve seen him do very different roles.7 January 2013 at 22:37 #671
I always thought the Doctor’s explanation about how the pollen (which is a hallucinogen when it heats up) just happened to float into the TARDIS was a bit … feeble. Sort of ‘I have no idea how that got in here, honestly’ feeble.
Sort of ‘isn’t it strange I knew exactly what was causing our hallucinations’ feeble. 🙂7 January 2013 at 22:25 #665
The poor man’s called Simm. 🙂 And Tony Ainley lasted all the way from Tom Baker to Sylvester McCoy, so it really is up to Steven Moffat.
John Simm is a good enough actor, and Steven Moffat a good enough writer, that they could presumably move the Master to a characterisation that’s somewhat less barking than it was under RTD. Fun as it was, I don’t want the Master like that all the time.
While Steven Moffat was still on Twitter, his response to the Benedict Cumberbatch rumour was ‘he’ll have to wait his turn’. Which did sound like he still thought of John Simm as the current Master (subject to availability).
Though, Rule One. Of course.7 January 2013 at 21:59 #653
Eight’s canon. His picture appeared in ‘The Next Doctor’ AND ‘The Eleventh Hour’. He couldn’t be more canon if Nine, Ten or Eleven had pointed to him and said ‘Oy! And that’s what I used to look like’. 🙂
The Master, okay? If they bring the Time Lords back, the Master has to come with them. And while the little pepperpots aren’t compulsory for anniversary specials, I think all the Anniversaries so far have included the Time Lords to at least some extent.
It does occur to me that – since we’re on Eleven and Matt Smith did once want to be a pro footballer – we could have a ‘Doctors Eleven’ match.7 January 2013 at 17:17 #617
Rather like the shot of Ailsa Berk in the background, with a warm purple puffa jacket – and the expression of a drill sergeant.
Cybermen … ATTEN-HUT!
But yes, my attitude to spoilers: if it’s on the BBC website, the Radio Times or in the trailer, it’s no longer a spoiler. It’s information the production team want out there.6 January 2013 at 21:45 #571
Do we have a ‘general’ general forum yet?
In the meantime, http://www.nature.com/news/quantum-gas-goes-below-absolute-zero-1.12146 sounds very Who-ish