Sea Devils And Die: GeroniMoffat's Doctor Who In The 2010s

I'm not saying anything until the rest of the world has had it broadcast.

thanks for reminding me to check my torrent sites... hah

in 49 years of uneven science fiction that's probably the first time I've actually yelled "OH FUCK OFF" at something in a doctor who episode

It was this scene, right?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk9xhrjzjXQ

yeah that aspect was regrettable. will admit i cried very very hard at the ending.

the quality of some of the dialogue made me cry tbh

wow, didn't know that was going to happen.

I'm not saying anything until the rest of the world has had it broadcast.

see you in six days

Didn't realise AUS was that late, but I'm happy to wait.

Isn't there like a body of water between where a certain statue is and manhattan? & wouldn't that entity have rather a lot of weight to transport.
Not plotholes in Dr Who, surely not?

Didn't realise AUS was that late, but I'm happy to wait.

― passive-aggressive display name (aldo), Sunday, 30 September 2012 18:20 (59 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

we get it on iview (basically the same as iplayer) the second it finishes in the uk, so anyone with connectivity who cares has seen it by now. terrestrial air date is six days later.

OK then, with apologies for people in the CoA who are waiting for the air date...

This was a great big pile of old emo bollocks, wasn't it?

I liked the general idea of the Angels building a big power battery, but to what end? The Angel of Liberty doesn't exactly DO anything, even once they make it mobile. Also, it was previously established they got their power from the action of sending somebody back in time (which was made explicit by Sally Sparrow's mate going back to the 30s and having a perfectly happy pastoral life in Middle England) so what keeping him in a room achieves is absolutely unclear. In fact, since normal people don't have access to time travel anybody they sent back is always trapped out of time and so achieves the same result. Moffatt should watch his own shows.

Angels are made of stone. So how does a giant copper panelled statue (over an iron and wood base?) become one of them? The handwave is obviously that the Whoniverse SoL isn't the same one as in ours, or that the Angels replaced it at some point (without going near how they did it, how they got rid of the old one etc) but it feels like lazy writing that it needed it. And where does the breath come from for the cherub Angel to blow out Rory's candle?

Angels can only move when they're not being observed. Right. So a GIANT STATUE can make it's way across the river and up the street (we hear the footsteps) with nobody ever seeing it in "the city that never sleeps"? For comparison, think of Cloverfield. For it to fit into this plot, by the time the monster is in Central Park it would have had to have got there without ANYBODY having seen it until it was there. Doesn't sound very likely, does it? Also the one that has grabbed River in the mid-plot isn't looked at for most of the time it's onscreen (or implied to be onscreen), and just disappears altogether so they can have the chat on the stairs and The Doctor can give up his last regeneration to heal River's wrist (which is another shitty idea).

How come Rory's death appears on the gravestone before he disappears, but Amy's doesn't until after she's gone? I did love how once she'd disappeared The Doctor couldn't give a fuck about the lone Angel that send them back and just leaves it to keep on zapping people in NYC. Or how the only person that seemed even vaguely bothered Rory had been zapped back in time was Amy. You know, you'd think if you'd just seen it happen to your dad you might crack your face slightly.

The worst bit though, and the worst example of ignoring what you wrote a couple of years ago, is the return to the events of The Eleventh Hour and little Amelia sitting in the garden. It's clear they way we're supposed to read it exactly as it appears to play out - that The Doctor goes back and takes the seven year old Amelia away on an adventure. Someone (not me) has gone back and rewatched TEE and confirms there is a scene where we hear the TARDIS noise with little Amelia giving a lookup and cutaway and don't see the Doctor so it is obviously supposed to be this point. HOWEVER... firstly, from a narrative standpoint, if the Tweedy Man or the Bow-Tie Man turned up and took her on an adventure, wouldn't that be much more memorable than the Raggedy Man who turned up one evening and ate a couple of odd things? And so therefore wouldn't a seven year old be far more likely to call him that? Secondly, Amy wants him to tell her it all. So Amelia always knows her future? Why didn't Amy in that case? Thirdly though, AND THIS IS JUST FUCKING SLOPPY, the events of The Eleventh Hour didn't happen. Moffatt wrote them out of time in The Big Bang when he made it so that Amy's parents didn't get sucked in through the crack in her wall and were always there for her. So little Amelia was never left on her own to be able to have the kitchen escapades with the Doctor and be convinced to pack her case and sit out all night in the garden.

It sums up what I hate about NuWho - the companions being the most important part of the story. They're not, they're our interface with the Whoniverse. It shouldn't be about THEM. Earthshock, for example, is about stopping the Cyberman invasion. The death of Adric is shocking (excuse the pun) but it's not a major part of the plot; it happens at the end and arguably the most important addition to the plot is that it provides the resolution to Cybermen in the TARDIS through using his badge. The freighter crashing is a minor point in comparison. Would Adric have solved it and prevented it if the Cyberman hadn't blown up the keyboard? Probably.

I don't know whether you got the trailer for Christmas afterwards so I won't talk about "Clara" but I suspect it provided a shock for people who hadn't read any BBC press releases etc over the past year.

Can we go back to "adventures in time and space" now please? Please?

Think that's pretty OTM. The angel that had River's wrist was chained up, but I'm not sure how efficacious that's supposed to be, but could explain why it wasn't a threat. Unless I missed that it got unchained at some point? Also, River did show a bit of emotion when she was telling Amy to let herself get zapped so she could be with Rory. A bit. My main problem with that scene was Amy'n'Doctor doing the "oh hello I have screwed my face up so you can tell this is a tense bit. Squinty cryey emotions over here!" school of acting.

On the other hand I did like the bit where they jumped, even if it was a bit heavy-handed "LOVE WILL SAVE EVERYTHING" for the trillionth time. At least it was not *literally* the power of love. And it also didn't actually work.

I don't mind so much about Who being about the companions and their relationship with/comprehension of the Doctor, but I can definitely see why you're frustrated when it leads to shoddy plotting.

"On the other hand I did like the bit where they jumped, even if it was a bit heavy-handed "LOVE WILL SAVE EVERYTHING" for the trillionth time. At least it was not *literally* the power of love. And it also didn't actually work."

It did though didn't it? It destroyed the battery thing and returned them to earth, it just wasn't as permanent as they'd hoped. & they did get to spend the rest of their lives together though not sure what the 5 year age gap between the pair of them on the gravestone indicated, whether they had to find each other again cos they arrived at different times? or just if one outlived the other.
Also not sure when graveyard was, does 80+ years indicate they went back to 1840 or thereabouts? Or was graveyard present day whenever that is to them. Did I just miss a plot point being explained the first time they were in that graveyard?

Well had me feeling pretty emotional but in a way it was a happy ending since they did get to grow old together instead of just vanishing completely or something. Not sure how much of a struggle that was 21st century person being stranded in the 19th century or whatever. Did she become a publisher/writer? Would that have been a possibility at that time?

The gravestone ages is straightforward. Arthur was born in 1982, Karen was born in 1987. It's a production crew in-joke.

Right, don't think I'd heard that one.

Well, I read the plan as "stop the angels from pursuing Rory and zapping him constantly". So in those terms, it totally didn't work, seeing as he got zapped again within five minutes of celebrating not being zapped.

But he wasn't zapped back to the miserable Angels factory farm, he was zapped back to a presumably fulfilling life in the past with his wife, as the Angels factory farm no longer existed.

I thought this was pretty decent actually, though probably could've done with being a two-parter so as better to balance the mystery/horror aspects and the emo aspects.

The age difference is presumably bcz Rory died first, as is his wont

I was really hoping that Amy and Rory creating the paradox would cause the Tardis to explode creating those cracks in the universe, so that would bring it all back to why Amy is important somehow, but eh, I guess we're just going to let all of that go now.

I wanted to be more moved by this, but it did seem a bit rushed. Also annoyed by Amy and Rory having a loooooong suicide pact goodbye while *not* looking at the GIGANTIC WEEPING ANGEL OF LIBERTY in front of them.

the GIGANTIC WEEPING ANGEL OF LIBERTY

This was just stupid. At the other end of the scale, the baby Angels worked well.

I did like how when the Daily Star EXCLUSIVELY revealed the Angel of Liberty thing a couple of months ago it was decried as stupid by a lot of the people currently saying it was brilliant.

I dunno, I thought the Liberty thingerbob was a great opportu just gag. The key was the pointy teeth, I think.

Anyway, Apart from the naff sepia fade at the end, I really enjoyed that, Moff back on form, etc

**opportunist gag

Agree with e.mily re this: I don't mind so much about Who being about the companions and their relationship with/comprehension of the Doctor, but I can definitely see why you're frustrated when it leads to shoddy plotting.

I'm perfectly willing to handwave tiny plotholes away (like what happens to the surviving Angel in the graveyard), but so much of that just doesn't hold up to the slightest bit of scrutiny. I just don't understand how a fixed point in time lasts 50 years, why couldn't he just pick them up a couple of years later? or meet them in Texas or something, if he couldn't go back to New York? You read a name on a gravestone so you can't change time - is that it?

But even if The Doctor couldn't take them along with him, then why couldn't he at least go visit them? since River presumably went back using her vortex manipulator to give Amy the book, I don't see why the Doctor couldn't do the same.

It's just sooo lazy and really detracted from the story they were trying to tell. I'm not the biggest fan of how Amy and Rory have been used/written in some of the stories, but they were great characters and deserved a better ending than this.

It's been established since Blink that when the Angels send someone back in time, there's nothing the Doctor can do to save them as it would rewrite time and make the universe explode or something. As a few people have pointed out, the Ponds' exit wasn't unlike Rose's, in that they're sent to a place where the Doctor can never see them. And then there's Donna too - the Doctor cannot visit her or the universe would explode. Only Martha seems to have avoided a similar fate.

I really don't care about the plausibility of the Statue of Liberty moving across Manhattan. It looked cool and scary.

Really? I remember somebody (Sadowitz, maybe?) saying the thing that put him off magic was David Copperfield making the Statue of Liberty "disappear". That you got to a point where an act, where the suspension of disbelief was the key, stretched your disbelief to the point you can't take it seriously.

Er...

Er...

Some more potentially horrendously obvious stuff:

If the Doctor can't go back to New York in the TARDIS, why don't they just meet in Washington or whatever?
Why doesn't Amy, having grown up knowing what always happens to her and having been given the book to publish by River, give the date and place for the rendezvous with the Doctor in it?
If River can meet up with time-dislocated Amy and give her the book, why can't the Doctor?
If the TARDIS can't go to New York, THE WHOLE REASON WHY RORY AND AMY 'DIE', then how does the Doctor take it back there AT THE END OF THE EPISODE to get the last page of the book?

If the TARDIS can't go to New York, THE WHOLE REASON WHY RORY AND AMY 'DIE', then how does the Doctor take it back there AT THE END OF THE EPISODE to get the last page of the book?

what??? the problem was that particular point in 1938 that he had trouble navigating into. The book was in the picnic basket in 2012.

WHY

WAS

AMY

WEARING

HARRY POTTER GLASSES.

You know, to look hip.

It sums up what I hate about NuWho - the companions being the most important part of the story. They're not, they're our interface with the Whoniverse. It shouldn't be about THEM.

I disagree with this. The GREAT thing about the 2005 series was that it was all happening through Rose's eyes. It was Rose's story; Rose's experience. The whole concept was infinitely relatable to a new generation of viewers, particularly females (let's just for one second ignore the show's complete lack of female writers for the first two years). That's what got it smashing the 10m viewer barrier or whatever it was that time. If this were all DOCTOR WHO: BLOKES IN SPACE it wouldn't have had half the eyeballs and therefore half the onsell revenue and merchandising.

On that, last week's episode was about Amy and Rory (which incidentally is why I got annoyed by all the anorak timey-wimey continuinty etc. analysis). This week's SHOULD have been about Amy and Rory (and, on the face of it, it was), but REALLY it was about stories about stories and determinism and angel farming and 750,000 hipsters who apparently all shut their eyes at exactly the same time at least twice. The two characters who should have been bang in focus were instead subject to a load of clever-pants Moffat horse shit. You actually can no longer watch this show without paying attention to the man behind the curtain, which is especially arrogant when he's writing out two of his show's leads.

A HUGE problem I had with this episode, as Roz & aldo mentioned: Why can't the Doctor just go to, I dunno, 1939 and grab Amy and Rory a year later? Why can't he do timey-wimey to leave them a note to get a train to say Albany and just pick them up there? The stakes were nowhere nearly high enough to justify that awkwardly emotional ending. And anyway, they'll just bloody retcon the whole thing because that's what they always do on this show now. Rose was supposed to be trapped permanently and immutably in Finland or whatever until suddenly she wasn't. Donna was never supposed to see or hear or even think about anyone ever again on pain of major torturous death, until she came back for an encore appearance like 12 minutes later. The Doctor was supposed to die properly last year until suddenly oh ha ha he is not dead see we tricked you. None of this 'permanence' shit means anything anymore.

Also, the angels have now been so over-used that they're no longer scary or suspenseful or even interesting.

What especially pisses me off is that this year had been superb.

btw I just checked the writing credits since 2005 to find that the only female writers in that time have been:

- Helen Raynor
- some school children

Also, the angels have now been so over-used that they're no longer scary or suspenseful or even interesting.

Same thing happened with the Borg. :(

What especially pisses me off is that this year had been superb.

Ditto! Except I hated "... Mercy."

Oh yeah I hated that one too, but I'm aware that loads of people liked it for pretty good reasons.

(and even 'hate' is unfair tbh, I just found it boring)

This wasn't well written but for me it was very sad.

No-one saw the Statue Of Liberty moving bcz New Yorkers are all jaded fucks.

creating the paradox would cause the Tardis to explode creating those cracks in the universe,

The Silence did it.

I did like how when the Daily Star EXCLUSIVELY revealed the Angel of Liberty thing a couple of months ago it was decried as stupid by a lot of the people currently saying it was brilliant.

Who?

If the Doctor can't go back to New York in the TARDIS, why don't they just meet in Washington or whatever?

It's been established since Blink that when the Angels send someone back in time, there's nothing the Doctor can do to save them as it would rewrite time and make the universe explode or something

Why doesn't Amy, having grown up knowing what always happens to her and having been given the book to publish by River, give the date and place for the rendezvous with the Doctor in it?
If River can meet up with time-dislocated Amy and give her the book, why can't the Doctor?

What? Your second question contradicts your first. Amy hasn't always grown up knowing what would happen to her, she isn't given the MS until she's time-dislocated (it seems).

You actually can no longer watch this show without paying attention to the man behind the curtain, which is especially arrogant when he's writing out two of his show's leads.

This is much less the case than with the last two producers, because he doesn't go urgently out of his way to make himself the public face of the show or spruik himself as the font of all ideas. Also it was much worse with RTD because his plot holes were so much huger and stupider, and his character knife-turns so unearned, that one was yelling at the set for 40 out of every 45 minutes, instead of grumping later about how stuff didn't fit together.

A HUGE problem I had with this episode, as Roz & aldo mentioned: Why can't the Doctor just go to, I dunno, 1939 and grab Amy and Rory a year later? Why can't he do timey-wimey to leave them a note to get a train to say Albany and just pick them up there?

It's been established since Blink that when the Angels send someone back in time, there's nothing the Doctor can do to save them as it would rewrite time and make the universe explode or something

And anyway, they'll just bloody retcon the whole thing because that's what they always do on this show now.

Moffatt has changed time in-story for plot reasons; Russell refused to actually earn moments, so he'd just have someone say "Rose can never see the Doctor again" or "all the Daleks but one have been destroyed," or "all the Time Lords are dead," or "all the Daleks have been destroyed AGAIN" so that he could go 'ZOMG I BROUGHT THEM BACK YOU WEREN'T EXPECTING THAT!' Either (or both!) of them can be annoying or frustrating to viewers' tastes, but one's a shit-lazy cheat and one isn't, imo.

The Doctor was supposed to die properly last year until suddenly oh ha ha he is not dead see we tricked you.

Nonsense, this was always going to be about revealing how the trick was done and how the Doctor came up with it. The show hadn't been cancelled forever.

It's been established since Blink that when the Angels send someone back in time, there's nothing the Doctor can do to save them as it would rewrite time and make the universe explode or something

also I notice it was all right for them to visit billion-year-old Rory on his death bed yet it's unacceptable for the Doctor to visit them now

that's just shoddy 'oh but oh but but' logic imo

Which is kind of inevitable in a time-travel story, you have to admit.

But if anyone's keeping track, I did like this episode. ;_;

Which is kind of inevitable in a time-travel story, you have to admit.

Yeah look I don't have a problem with the odd accidental paradox or inaccuracy or whatever creeping into timey-wimey episodes, I just don't buy into this idea that (a) the Doctor can't just sort of meet up with them in 1939/Atlantic City/&c. and (b) that they will never ever undo this ridiculous ~law of science~ in order to bring them back for a 50th anniversary special.

also re this

Nonsense, this was always going to be about revealing how the trick was done and how the Doctor came up with it. The show hadn't been cancelled forever.

― ┐(´ー｀)┌ (sic), Monday, 1 October 2012 11:11 (19 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Obviously the show was never cancelled forever and obviously the Doctor was never going to die, but Moffat expended more energy than was necessary promising that the Doctor would genuinely die and that there was genuinely no trick, even though at the time we all know it was complete bollocks.

so you'll forgive me for not falling in line with any other promises he makes ever.

(xpost) c'mon, that'd be FOURTEEN MONTHS away, any loopholes would be totally earned by then

also I notice it was all right for them to visit billion-year-old Rory on his death bed yet it's unacceptable for the Doctor to visit them now

they didn't visit him though, they bumped into naturally AFTER his entire time-displaced life had lived out - they never found out he'd been displaced and even attempted to track him down.

we saw the ex-cop on his deathbed in Blink too, after his entire displaced etc etc

Obviously the show was never cancelled forever and obviously the Doctor was never going to die, but Moffat expended more energy than was necessary promising that the Doctor would genuinely die and that there was genuinely no trick, even though at the time we all know it was complete bollocks.

where did he do this?