|
Post by Von Dawning on Nov 30, 2013 1:01:08 GMT
My current theory is that the Valeyard was the one that blew up the Tardis and set the silence in motion. No-one else has more cause to take out Gallifrey, especially as the Doctor is entering his final regeneration: the Valeyard could be trying to change history to ensure that he exists at all, or to kickstart, and then 'steal' a new Doctor regen cycle.
Also, if he IS the bad guy whose presence was felt way back in Smith's first ep, then truly he is the Ultimate Foe.
|
|
|
Post by Von Dawning on Nov 30, 2013 1:03:43 GMT
Also if I had the money and the authority you can bet damn well I'd wrap it all up with a three-parter of Capaldi Vs. Valeyard with Valeyard played by Ian McKellan. Or maybe Charles Dance.
|
|
|
Post by ShayMay on Dec 5, 2013 18:55:35 GMT
So it's been all but confirmed that Matt Smith, whom, until the end of last season, we thought was the Eleventh Doctor, is not the Twelfth but the THIRTEENTH incarnation.John Hurt, the War Doctor, was the missing incarnation, so who's the other one? The Metacrisis Doctor.All right, so here's a feature I like to call "Shay's Big List of Why That's Kinda Disappointing!" 1) The Metacrisis Doctor is [censored] that breaks all the established rules of regeneration anyway. Davies has explicitly stated that he doesn't care about the 13-incarnation rule and would happily just ignore it and keep going. I've been re-watching Davies' run and I have a new appreciation for what he did with the show, but it has to be said that his grasp on how to structure the rules of a sci-fi show have been fairly loose. Plus, the Metacrisis Doctor was basically just fan-fiction so Rose would have a happy ending. Basically, I would be more than happy to file the Metacrisis Doctor under "RTD [censored]" and forget all about him. 2) We've JUST HAD the revelation that Matt Smith's Doctor is not the Eleventh but the Twelfth Doctor. The same revelation feels quite damp the second time you use it, especially when it comes just a month after the first. 3) It shows just how unwilling Doctor Who is to stick to anything resembling a cohesive narrative. I had my suspicions when Season 6 spent its entire second half ignoring River Song (it would have been a perfect opportunity for a six-part, cohesive story depicting the trio going to find River, rather than just six self-contained adventures), but this basically all but confirms that the show does not give a [censored] about a well-structured narrative... 4) ...or character development. This comes on both sides of the problem. If the Eleventh Doctor knew he was, in fact, in his final incarnation, why has it never come up before now? It strikes me as something that he would have at least mentioned in passing, or perhaps informed some of his decisions? From the other end of the problem, if Peter Capaldi is the first of a whole new set of regenerations, then it robs him of what could be a solid motivation, or any kind of character development. Wanting to live on strikes me as a fairly solid narrative hook that could glue events together, and to see that potential wasted is quite disappointing. From a continuity perspective, it does make sense... it just feels to me like they're basically going "right, let's just get it out of the way and move on", rather than dedicating any time to the problem.
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Dec 5, 2013 19:58:55 GMT
3) It shows just how unwilling Doctor Who is to stick to anything resembling a cohesive narrative. I had my suspicions when Season 6 spent its entire second half ignoring River Song (it would have been a perfect opportunity for a six-part, cohesive story depicting the trio going to find River, rather than just six self-contained adventures), but this basically all but confirms that the show does not give a [censored] about a well-structured narrative... The show has never really had a fully overarching narrative throughout its stories in any incarnation (with a few brief exceptions). Even in the modern series, the most we ever got from RTD was the word 'Bad Wolf' showing up in every episode or similar minor little things. The point, as it's always really been, is that you can watch the stories independent of one another and not lose very much for it. This isn't Breaking Bad, it's Doctor Who - an easily consumed family program on for a few weekends a year. Ultimately, I find it a bit of a null argument, really. The series isn't out to deliver that at all, and never makes any claim to do so. If that's what you need every show you watch to do for it to be enjoyable, then that's a pity - but the majority of the most successful shows past and present are not this - and that plays a great part in their success. It's also a show about time travel and rewriting history (including the Doctor's own, on multiple occasions throughout 50 years of hundreds of creative directors and writers stamping their own influence upon it). Changing 'established' history is basically par for the course. Hell, the 50th Anniversary special was devoted to rewriting the biggest piece of canon that defined the new modern series. Smith's Doctor has already faced the certainty of his proper, final death multiple times under Moffat's run. He was meant to die in The Big Bang 2 when he wrote himself out of history to restart the Universe (but he got out of it). He actually died when Melody/River poisoned him (but he got better). He was meant to die, properly and on actual future record, when River shot him (but he got out of it), and he's been to his own actual grave (and he'll get out of it). There's been plenty of character development throughout Smith's entire run dedicated to the idea that the Doctor is going to die. There's even a pretty emotional scene in The Name of the Doctor where he's uncharacteristically moved to tears by the fact he's being confronted with his own mortality. If anything, this is the perfect apex of character development for Smith's Doctor - to actually finally face it down and, at least in a sense, actually die. You say that it robs Cipaldi's Doctor of a solid character motivation, while I say it exemplifies Smith's. They also have to be somewhat careful how to play the Doctor avoiding his ultimate demise if they're paying heed to the regeneration limit in the first place - as that's exactly what drove the Master towards his own acts, and that's not really a story thread worth tugging on unless you're going to devote the space to doing it properly (and for reasons mentioned above, there's little value to doing so). I'd say it feels like that because that's exactly what it is. The 13 regeneration limit rule was always something of an albatross for the modern series. Back when it was first dreamt up, it was considered very unlikely they'd ever run into it for it to be a consideration at all, but certainly as the modern series became increasingly popular with Tennant as the 10th Doctor, it was clear that little awkward bit of canon was going to have to be either seen to eventually or avoided entirely. That's why RTD made a joke of it on the rare occasion it came up, or trivialised it entirely (the Timelords, for example, gave the Master an entirely new set of regenerations just like that - and with Gallifrey back, I wouldn't be surprised to see the same kind of easy solution for the Doctor, to be honest). Moffat's view, clearly, is that since they are basically in the position to address it (not counting the metacrisis Doctor, it would have to be within Cipaldi's run at the latest now), so it only makes sense to take the issue, give it a solution, and carry on. There isn't really that much point in spending much more time on it, as it's essentially only an issue to those of us who are nerdy enough to know there should be a limit in the first place and would simply complain if it were completely ignored. As for whether it works in the canon of the series, I'd say it makes more than enough sense given other events. River was shown to have used up all her regenerations to give the Doctor life again, so we do have an actual demonstration that just because the regeneration process didn't result in a refreshed Timelord, it doesn't mean the regeneration itself wasn't used up. As a writer, you could choose to ignore it, or you could choose to include it, Moffat's presumably made the choice to include it, so that's that. Pretty much the same applies to the regeneration limit itself, really. It could just as easily have been ignored as dealt with one way or another. Frankly, it's an irrelevance either way as the series was never going to stop after Cipaldi (or after his successor had Hurt's Doctor not been included) regardless. So long as it works within the story it's given to, it doesn't really matter.
|
|
|
Post by ShayMay on Dec 5, 2013 20:46:36 GMT
If that's what you need every show you watch to do for it to be enjoyable, then that's a pity - but the majority of the most successful shows past and present are not this - and that plays a great part in their success. I don't understand where this has come from. I gave no indication that this would ruin the show, I just said I thought it would be disappointing. I understand that Doctor Who isn't going to be particularly heavy on the cohesive storytelling, and I don't think it ever should be. But there are levels between "Doctor Who" and "Breaking Bad": I don't mean every episode in a series should be dedicated to following the same train of thought absolutely, but I think some attempt to tie everything together would be nice. Maybe something like the cracks in time, but more focused on the Doctor's attitude. For example (and this is a basic example and I understand the flaws in it), maybe he is dying and seeks to find a way to extend his life, so he goes and investigates various legends about extending life, or something. That's the hook for the season. He investigates it, things go tits up, he goes back to the TARDIS and tries again. Maybe he does go through a Master-like phase for an episode, before realising his mistake. Y'know, character development, or at least the continuation of a theme. You can do that sort of thing without forcing the audience to watch every single episode. That's a good point, but it was never heading towards an inevitable demise. In the Big Bang 2, he made that decision for the good of the universe, and gave himself a way to reintroduce himself back into existence. He didn't expect River to poison him, and spent his entire time dying trying to deal with her. He even cheated his own death at a fixed point in time: remember, it was the funny clone robot that he put himself inside. My point is, the narrative made no bones about these things not actually being his death. The closest we've come is Trenzalore, and I thought that was sowing the seeds for much later. I certainly never got the impression that we were headed there so soon, nor that it would be Smith's Doctor that was doing it. I don't feel like he was focused on the single event of his death, really, it always felt like he was, at most, sowing the seeds for his next incarnation. To cut it short: I never felt like he had any reservations or problems with going to Trenzalore. I thought that was because he had one regeneration left, so he COULDN'T die on this visit. But since he is the last, why would he be so casual about going there? And that sticks in my craw. I'm not condemning the show! I really like it. I just think that it's evident that this has been a last-minute, rushed decision, and that disappoints me a bit. Edit: Oh, also, the whole thirteen lives thing? It was never a minor point. It wasn't something mentioned once or twice in passing: entire story arcs were written around it in the old show.
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Dec 5, 2013 22:08:38 GMT
The closest we've come is Trenzalore, and I thought that was sowing the seeds for much later. I certainly never got the impression that we were headed there so soon, nor that it would be Smith's Doctor that was doing it. I don't feel like he was focused on the single event of his death, really, it always felt like he was, at most, sowing the seeds for his next incarnation. To cut it short: I never felt like he had any reservations or problems with going to Trenzalore. I thought that was because he had one regeneration left, so he COULDN'T die on this visit. But since he is the last, why would he be so casual about going there? Trenzalore was first mentioned as "the fall of the 11th". It was always pretty clear to the audience at least that whatever the stuff about Trenzalore was about, it'd have something to do with Smith's regeneration. I'd also say he hardly travelled there without reservation, he very much made a point about his reservation - and he absolutely wouldn't have gone at all if the Great Intelligence hadn't specifically stacked the situation so that he couldn't refuse. As for the idea that he could feel safe he wouldn't die just because he has regenerations left, it's been well established that Timelords can die regardless of their regenerations - again, Smith's Doctor has gone through this on screen twice already (again, he just so happened to get better/get out of it). Even if he had a bunch of regenerations 'in hand', he could still go to Trenzalore and he could still die. As for why he goes there in the Christmas special, we don't yet know - though it doesn't seem from the synopsis that he's actually aware that it's Trenzalore he's going to. I wouldn't really consider it rushed, but certainly they wouldn't be doing this storyline about Trenzalore now if Smith hadn't decided to finish his contract - and I'm assuming that a not small part of Moffat tackling the idea of the regeneration limit is because he isn't likely to be around for the end of Cipaldi's run to do so then. It does make a lot of sense to deal with all of this as a final part of Smith's Doctor and wrapping up the rest of Moffat's stories. But to suggest that it could be anything other than a notion built now, for the current scenario, and instead considered at the very beginning of Series 5 with everything as a massive overarching theme is to attribute more concious design to the series than anyone is willing to creatively apply. That might be a disappointment for you, but for me personally, it doesn't really affect my view on the series. It's a minor point in the fact that, one way or another, it actually doesn't matter to the show. It never could have done - the series would have to get past it regardless and no-one could be under any illusion otherwise. Yes, you could dedicate episode after episode to it, but why bother? A massive amount of the people watching have never watched anything before 2005. We've already seen similar themes in Tennant's final episodes of the Doctor wanting to avoid his death (Waters of Mars effectively gives you exactly what you're after in terms of seeing a Master-like effect on the Doctor for it), so it'd already be retreading recently familiar ground to do so anyway. Not even taking into account the idea that you could arguably attribute a lot of Smith's Doctor's character development as specifically taking a look at his own mortality. What's actually gained from the idea that Cipaldi's Doctor could spend his entire 3 or so year run whining about the fact he's going to die over tackling the concept right away, at the first possible opportunity and just being done with it?
|
|
|
Post by Devo DrakeFox on Dec 26, 2013 11:02:37 GMT
So who watched the special last night? I thought it was pretty epic but at the same time quite confusing. Like the people in the town of Christmas. Were they human or just humanoid? And what of the Time Lords? With that crack in reality sealed (again) are they locked outside the universe again or have they ceased to be forever? And how, how, HOW the [censored] could the Cybermen make a functional wooden Cyberman!?
|
|
|
Post by Ringo (2015 Edition) on Dec 26, 2013 17:00:12 GMT
I thoroughly enjoyed the festive special last night, although it was very confusing. I thought Mother Superious stole the show somewhat, and the ultimate saying from the Doctor for me when he was about to face the Daleks was "I'll probably die of boredom before they shoot me." Fantastic episode, loved the town of Christmas and the wooden Cyberman. Still don't know how it existed though.
|
|
|
Post by Von Dawning on Feb 11, 2014 5:03:02 GMT
So rumours are abound that Charles Dance will play The Master. Me right now:
|
|
|
Post by ShayMay on Feb 17, 2014 16:35:31 GMT
Actually, hold on, I've just remembered something: in The Impossible Astronaut Matt Smith clearly started regenerating before River cut it short. So... that's a fairly big plot hole there, no? She, of all people, should have known that the Eleventh was actually the Thirteenth.
|
|
|
Post by Beeth on Feb 17, 2014 21:28:10 GMT
It was the Teselecta, in the form of the Doctor. I think it's safe to assume it didn't know about the War Doctor at that point, hence simulating a "regeneration".
|
|
|
Post by ShayMay on Feb 18, 2014 1:14:59 GMT
It was the Teselecta, in the form of the Doctor. I think it's safe to assume it didn't know about the War Doctor at that point, hence simulating a "regeneration". Ahh, yeah, forgot about that. I'd still expect River to know about it though, hence no need for cancelling the regeneration but that's not really a plot hole. Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by Knuckles on Dec 1, 2015 23:42:33 GMT
Long time no messages on this thread. I have to say I am not a fan of Capaldi and the new series in general
|
|