Doctor Who 2008: Sontarans cometh, RTD Ood 'ave 'im etc.

The bad jokes were wonderful! Dr Who is all about terrible jokes! Isn't it?

Thought the Doctor SLIGHTLY overdid his blithe-and-chatty-blind-eye-to-deadly-danger stuff (i.e. we need to actually feel scared), but Tennant's so good at that stuff it must be nigh impossible for the writers to control themselves.

Strangely, when Donna really tries to burrow into the never-explained distinction the Doctor makes between historical events that are in flux vs "fixed" events (the former of which he can/will alter, the latter of which he can't/won't), when she asks the very sensible question "How do you know the difference?", the Doctor 99% of the time would give some deflective, cavalier "timey wimey" answer but this time he turns serious as night, levels his gaze at her and practically pronounces himself God, saying something like "I know what has passed, what will come, and what must never be. For that is the burden of the Timelords."

Of course, five minutes later he realizes that he's actually responsible for the destruction of Pompeii.

Also, and I'm excusing this on account of the compressed iPlayer audio, I have no idea what was going on with those circuit boards.

The lava joke was played perfectly.

What's up with Rose just vanishing though? Surely that's a faux Rose of some kind? And she never used to be so slinky and sultry.

I say the walls between universes are getting porous, and she's no idea she's crossing between the two. Mebbe.

I think Rose is a Cylon.

He didn't seem to know whether the family were fixed or otherwise, surely he was meant to save them because otherwise we'd have ended up with a Father's Day scenario?

Can you explain what you mean to those of us who haven't seen the episode you're referring to?

I think he means she's the last of the Final Five.

Haha I guess there's a lot I missed. Oh well.

Tracer the episode I'm referring to is when the Doctor takes Rose back in time to see her father's death (happy jaunt that it is). Rose breaks free of the Doctor and pushes him out of the way of an oncoming car. The fact there's a guy alive that shouldn't be means the earth is invaded by time reaper type things whose job is to 'tidy up' the paradox by essentially eating everything on earth. Then Rose's dad works out what's going on and kills himself, and everything reverts to normal.

It's one of the best in nu-Who, well worth seeing.

Crazy! But what paradox would a dead marble merchant's family create?

http://wiki.arcadecontrols.com/w/images/7/7f/MarbleMadness_lvl2.gif

The kind of paradox where someone has to explain the existence of a 1950's Police Call Box on a stone tablet in a household Gods shrine in Rome.

That family was nothing like an ancient Roman family. The dialogue was like bloody Hollyoaks. Why??

Crazy! But what paradox would a dead marble merchant's family create?

This is also covered in Father's Day - Rose says "but he's just an ordinary man he's not going to change anything" and the Doctor is all "that makes no difference".

So he takes them up a cliff and makes then watch all their friends and family hopelessly tortured to death, then just leaves them there.

Um sorry am I missing something? Rose's dad was supposed to die - he gets hit by a car. She goes into the past and saves his life. Which creates big problems, Reavers come, he kills himself, time is healed, yay.

In the Pompeii episode, the Doctor realizes that unless he blows Pompeii to smithereens, these stone-beast alien thingies will destroy the entire planet. So Pompeii must go. The family is huddled all together in the corner, waiting to be buried in ash. If the Doctor just lets them die, what paradox or time problem would he be creating??

I thought he decided to save them because Donna's pleas touched his heart.

The dialogue was like bloody Hollyoaks. Why??

TARDIS translation circuitry. At the beginning of the episode Donna tries out saying "Veni Vedi Vici" to a tradesman and he says "What? Speak up, darlin."

No he would be creating a paradox by saving them, UNLESS he was supposed to save them in the first place. But he didn't seem to know that. Which would be fine but doesn't really square with "I know what has passed, what will come, and what must never be. For that is the burden of the Timelords."

Yeah not much at all, in any episode, really squares with that.

is saving some random people really any different than selecting companions tho? he doesn't foresee things on that level

The dialogue was like bloody Hollyoaks. Why??

TARDIS translation circuitry. At the beginning of the episode Donna tries out saying "Veni Vedi Vici" to a tradesman and he says "What? Speak up, darlin."

-- Tracer Hand, Monday, 14 April 2008 20:56 (23 minutes ago) Bookmark

But the way they were acting toward each other, everything, it was just awful. The other historical stories didn't do that.

Wasn't the conceit of the recent "Rome" series on television that the ancient Romans really just acted like we do, except with more togas and licentiousness? I thought this episode was just sort of running with that.

xxxpost "I know all. Except I spend about 5 minutes in every episode going 'WHAT?? That's impossible!!'"

Tracer has the right attitude.

Roman family talking like crap soap characters was played for deliberate lolz and it worked.

I liked the sulky son.

I'd just like to point out that the "Father's Day" paradox is not a general paradox rule but it tells you what happens when you try to interfere with your own timeline. Rose can't save her dad because in her timeline, her dad was never alive. Also worth noting that the doctor says if the Time Lords were still around they would be able to fix the paradox but in the doctor's own timeline, the Time Lords are gone preventing them from fixing paradoxes and making sure time works exactly as it should.

Same with the Doctor interfering with past historical events, but making small changes that make no difference - the only reason he's in the past is because his companion is from the future. They become part of events - so many times it's the Doctor himself who causes the historical event, something that he himself can't know beforehand because it's in his own future timeline.

But he does know what happens to the rest of the universe - so he knows that aliens can't destroy the human race in ancient Rome because he meets all his human companions in the future, and it's his job to keep the events as he knows them, otherwise he'd be creating a paradox in his own timeline and that's when them reaper things turn up. Time is a very personal thing for a Time Lord.

also, because it all makes damn good TV.

i would like it to be known that near the end when roman family son and daughter held hands, there was a cry of 'hurray, roman incest' from the Rome watchers here.

Maybe there's an INCEST AGENDAR running through this whole series?

(OK Roz that makes sense)

I loved it, but whenever I see Peter Capaldi or Phil Davis in anything, no matter how shit it sounds, the instinct is OMG YAY.

Yes.

Phil Davis is Britain's greatest actor, large or small screen. Just thought I'd mention that.

I even watched that subpar North Square to watch the Davis act the schmuck, brilliantly.

Does anyone else think by casting Capaldi now they've scuppered a potential post-Tennant nu-Who? It better not be fuckin' Nesbitt.

Nu-Who has already been cast (from my grapevine) as failed UK > US actor Sean Maguire. Staying young, and staying short.

I know this is true because Pete told me.

If they really wanted to cast Capaldi as the Doctor they'd just do it anyway, have him make an in-joke about slightly Roman features in his first scene and then move on.

Haha Capaldi would make an awesomely irascible Doctor

Next Doctor should be a zing master, really. Like when Ecclestone used to be a complete cunt to Mickey just for the fun of it, but worse.

Phil Davis kinda lacks range tho. i think his lahndan accent came thru a few times during his more bullish Doctor-trolling.

I am standing by my nomination of Julian Rhind-Tutt for next Doctor.

Maybe he'd done time in Lahhndinium?

Rhind-Tutt = subtle zinger as witnessed in Hippies, Green Wing and those Barclaycard ads. But maybe he's TOO dry. I have yet to hear a better contender tho.

He lacks an X factor though.

or specifically THE x factor required of a 21st century doctor

He's a bit weedy and ineffectual (though I do love him very much), isn't he? xpost, yes, lacking in x factor

I would like David Morrissey to do it. Or Aiden Gillan (RTD can write him as a zingy bastard no bother at all).

David Morrissey to play Gordon Brown in this year's Christmas special apparently, so that looks off the cards. (Although I am reminded of Colin Baker on the Arc Of Infinity documentary.)

and Eve Myles in the etc etc.

The same insider that tipped me off on Sean Maguire has also said the downtime between series (the three specials next week) will see a BBC Talent Show which has the working title of Who Wants To Me A Companion - but will probably be called Who's Baby, or something silly like that to find the next assistant.

Unlike Maria-esque shows however they will be looking at particular Who skill's like reactions on things being bigger inside than outside, screaming, wuving the Doctor, having irritating parents and running down corridor skills.

No he would be creating a paradox by saving them, UNLESS he was supposed to save them in the first place.

I get the feeling that the Doctor should not have saved them, and while it may not have created a paradox it may create problems for him somewhere down the road. Maybe it causes the timey-wimey rift that let Rose shift between worlds in the first ep?

Obviously he was supposed to save them so they could live on in the Latin course most British students take. Most Septics would miss that detail.