[Official] Doctor Who Thread


Recommended Posts

Its not because im a Matt Smith hater im actually warming to him a bit but the material and companions hes been given are ruining this show, whats wrong with having an episode of the week, Moffats previous episodes like Blink, Silence in the Library/Forest of the Dead were amazing episodes and didnt have some ridiculous over the top story arc through them, well Silence did in relation to River Song but the episodes themselves were standalone.

Bored of Doctor Who now.

Moffat is the worst thing thats happened to the show, i thought this series they were going to tone it down a bit as its tiring trying to figure out what the hell is going on with all this ridiculous story arc bull**** with crossing over timelines. Im not against a story arc or a common thread but its beginning to get a bit boring all these "i have to tell you something........whisper whisper whisper" then the obligatory "omg what did he say........" then you dont find out till the last episode, its just a convoluted mess of a story.

I don't get what's so convoluted and hard to understand about this storyline? Maybe people are just trying over think it too much, but taking it at face value it's rather easy to follow. There's kids in my house who follow the story perfectly well without explanation :/. I guess some people just don't like mystery? But that doesn't make it confusing, it just makes it a mystery :p

Apart from River Song, I very much liked this episode. I just don't think she's a strong enough character / actor to hold the weight of this entire storyline being centred around her, I I'll be glad to see her gone whistle.gif

<img><img>

Matt Smith, who plays The Doctor, revealed he does not find his dazzling co-star Karen Gillan, 23, sexy.

The actor, who returns to our screens in Dr Who tonight, said: 'Karen?s a five out of ten - and you can tell her I said that.'

He added ungallantly: 'It?s pretty weird seeing Karen in her underwear (in magazines). Actually, seeing she can be sexy is quite weird, frankly, because I just know her as "Stupid-face Karen".

Karen-Gillan-Underwear.jpg

This man is clearly blind, I mean how can you not find this sexy! xP

Steven Moffat

View profile

More options Jan 8 1995, 8:21 pm

Here's a particularly stupid theory. If we take "The Doctor" to

be the Doctor's name - even if it is in the form of a title no

doubt meaning something deep and Gallifreyan - perhaps our

earthly use of the word "doctor" meaning healer or wise man is

direct result of the Doctor's multiple interventions in our

history as a healer and wise man. In other words, we got it from

him. This is a very silly idea and I'm consequently rather proud

of it.

Steven Moffat

Regarding this,

I don't think Moffat got it quite right. The word "doctor" has had a lot of negative uses. For example, we talk about "doctoring photos", "doctoring evidence", "spin doctoring", and so on. Originally, "doctor" referred to a teacher in the Church, in a way that had positive connotations, but even then the word had a meaning more suggestive of "one who makes things seem right", more than an unambiguously positive appraisal as a "healer" or "wise man"

But I guess that might fit with "Rule #1: The Doctor Lies"

No doubt she is gorgeous. Her character can be annoying at times, though. I just tune out the sound and watch her when that happens.

I think she's pretty in a cute way, I don't think the "glam" looks in some modeling shoots she's done fit her, its kind of an odd match. I'd say the same thing for some other actresses who have done these types of shoots.

Seems my favourite episodes of this series are all ones where River Song doesn't turn up :p Another nice episode, makes a nice change of pace.

Next weeks should be fun too, David Walliams is playing a bad guy is he not? Seems like they won't be concerning themselves much with this series' main storyline again either, which means no Rvier Song, so instant 1+! :p

God not the darleks how many times do they need find a way to come back.

Well they are the Doctor's most famous enemy, so they will never go away for that long. And will always find a way to come back and make the Doctor's day a headache somehow.

Just er-watched the "Genesis of the Darlek" with Tom Baker.

It would be interesting if they could make a new story where the present-day (?) Doctor somehow interferes with a past episode, say perhaps the "Genesis of the Darlek" saga. How know ho Captain Sisco from Star Trek's DS9 whent back in time and and hand some Troubles with the Tribbles?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gDeTNvKiz

The 10th Doctor and to some extent the current Doctor have said several times that they can't go into their own timelines (or anyone elses timeline for that matter) to alter things etc. If I remember correctly, Rose did this by saving her father in an Eccelston episode and these monsters of time (or something) came and tried to fix the paradox/causality issues the event created in the alternate timeline.

But I agree with you. Ever since the reboot of the series, I've wanted the Doctor to travel to the Dalek homeworld or go back and interfere with his own actions from past episodes (like Genesis of the Daleks etc) and sort of reset the Daleks or redo them, or something. Maybe even get rid of them for good, by making them not so evil/emotionless etc.

I think it's something best left to the imagination. You could never show it on screen and do it justice, not with any budget.

I agree. But if they are going to do it, it should be for the 50th anniversary or for when the show is finally cancelled for good. You know, go out with a huge bang so to speak. Unless they are planning to show what happened in the Time War and retcon some of it for future episodes down the road. Which I could see happen since it does kind of limit them storyline wise in some respects. Then again, it really doesn't lol

The 10th Doctor and to some extent the current Doctor have said several times that they can't go into their own timelines (or anyone elses timeline for that matter) to alter things etc. If I remember correctly, Rose did this by saving her father in an Eccelston episode and these monsters of time (or something) came and tried to fix the paradox/causality issues the event created in the alternate timeline.

But I agree with you. Ever since the reboot of the series, I've wanted the Doctor to travel to the Dalek homeworld or go back and interfere with his own actions from past episodes (like Genesis of the Daleks etc) and sort of reset the Daleks or redo them, or something. Maybe even get rid of them for good, by making them not so evil/emotionless etc.

I've been thinking about this too. Both 9th and 10th doctor were really against any paradox and said how impossible it is by ripping time and space apart..

The Daleks won't be appearing in season 6.

I've been thinking about this too. Both 9th and 10th doctor were really against any paradox and said how impossible it is by ripping time and space apart..

The Daleks won't be appearing in season 6.

Well how does time work in Doctor Who anyway? They already created a type of paradox, under some models of time travel. They went back to save the past Amy with the help of the future Amy, and the future Amy only existed because they didn't save the past Amy. Saving the past Amy would mean none of that ever happened.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • Bluesky COO warns social media regulations could destroy competition from small startups by Paul Hill Fears that increasing government control of social media risks regulatory capture by the biggest social media firms were raised again recently. Bluesky’s chief operating officer said in an interview that social media bans for children and tighter regulations for social media firms risk creating a world where there are only a few social media platforms run by companies with the deepest pockets. Regulations on social media firms have been very lax since they appeared for mainstream users in the 2000’s. This gave Meta, Snapchat, and Google time to build up their user bases and get entrenched, with Meta being the most successful. Now that Meta has succeeded, it has been attempting regulatory capture. By pushing for more regulations of social media, Meta hopes to make it more difficult for rivals to challenge it. For its part, it doesn’t need to worry about the cost of regulation because it has a lot of money to spend, whereas startups do not. Speaking to CNBC, Rose Wang, Bluesky’s chief operating officer, said: “I support the protection and the safety of youth, the question that we have then is at what cost, because essentially what I’m scared of is in the long term, we’re headed to a world where there’s about three to five platforms, and extreme heavy regulation of those platforms, and basically the whole compliance teams of these platforms are 10 times the size of our entire team. So, basically, we’re living in a world where it’s almost impossible for smaller entrants to come in and build healthier spaces. These platforms have led to a place where the bottom line is the thing that drives what they do... so I understand why governments have to step in and regulate, because the platforms have done nothing right.” She said that while she is not against regulation, there needs to be more channels between the small to mid-sized players and regulators to help protect them. She says that big tech players, on the other hand, “who we know are circumventing regulation,” need to be regulated. Essentially, the Bluesky position is one of nuance, rather than absolutes. While Bluesky’s proposal may preserve competition in the social media space, it still doesn’t address the massive privacy implications these age verification measures introduce, such as handing over sensitive identity documents to access age-gated content. Source: CNBC
    • it dosnt support onprem exchange. it dosnt support mapi-calls. the views are all worse/limited. its slower. it cant see public folder calendars. we already have webmail. the list of other missing features is pretty huge but i only see it when customers call to say their email isnt working, and 9/10 times its cause they accidentality changed to outlooknew(new). Hold the line everyone!
    • yeah, this looks beautiful. Damn this winter's going to be great.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      493
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      249
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      71
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      70
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!