Doctor Who

[Agent Gibbs]

So how did River get to Amy if it was impossible to get back to that time again? I thought The Doctor said it would be impossible to get back to that time so how did River manage it? Was it with her Vortex Manipulator or something? Sorry for all the dumb questions but it's not so clear to me, lmao.

 

We still disagree on this. I don't buy the "the Doctor can't visit them because he'd simply take them on another adventure" theory. It's too thin. In my opinion it's heavily implied that Rory and Amy's fixed timeline is closed off from time travellers, meaning they literally won't be able to see the Doctor ever again - nor River, I believe; she mentions she'll send the book to Amy for publication, and the way the Doctor apologises to her heavily suggests she won't be able to see them again, either.

 

The book, however, has already been written and published, so it's already part of the timeline.

 

 

see now this here illustrates my problem! by doctor who logic once something is read it has to happen (aka breaking wrists etc) so the book MUST be written and published by River AFTER all of the events, which means she physically must have visited Amy and Rory to complete the book and have it published in the past, ala this all is a very weak plot point to write two people out!

It was specifically said manhatten 1930's was too dangerous to travel to, so obviously either traveling elsewhere or to a year later is allowed.

So they could have been saved and there were ways around it, the only thing stopping it is the Doctor's own rules, which do not apply to all time travellers, its a moral code or a precautionary code to prevent further problems.

 

Besides all that, i find it very surprising one angel could survive a paradox, other than it was purely for a plot point

[Serebii]

see now this here illustrates my problem! by doctor who logic once something is read it has to happen (aka breaking wrists etc) so the book MUST be written and published by River AFTER all of the events, which means she physically must have visited Amy and Rory to complete the book and have it published in the past, ala this all is a very weak plot point to write two people out!

It was specifically said manhatten 1930's was too dangerous to travel to, so obviously either traveling elsewhere or to a year later is allowed.

So they could have been saved and there were ways around it, the only thing stopping it is the Doctor's own rules, which do not apply to all time travellers, its a moral code or a precautionary code to prevent further problems.

 

Besides all that, i find it very surprising one angel could survive a paradox, other than it was purely for a plot point

The angel still existed before the paradox, in New York, before all this happened...that's why there was one left

[Agent Gibbs]

The angel still existed before the paradox, in New York, before all this happened...that's why there was one left

 

that will explain that bit then

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

see now this here illustrates my problem! by doctor who logic once something is read it has to happen (aka breaking wrists etc) so the book MUST be written and published by River AFTER all of the events, which means she physically must have visited Amy and Rory to complete the book and have it published in the past, ala this all is a very weak plot point to write two people out!

It was specifically said manhatten 1930's was too dangerous to travel to, so obviously either traveling elsewhere or to a year later is allowed.

So they could have been saved and there were ways around it, the only thing stopping it is the Doctor's own rules, which do not apply to all time travellers, its a moral code or a precautionary code to prevent further problems.

 

Besides all that, i find it very surprising one angel could survive a paradox, other than it was purely for a plot point

 

She doesn't need to have visited Rory and Amy, she specifically says she'll send it to Amy, suggesting she can't visit her. The timeline is fixed and temporally fragile, ruling out any visits from time travellers (this obviously doesn't just apply to New York in the 1930s, otherwise the Doctor would know he could visit them and wouldn't be so heartbroken), but the book is already part of the timeline and thus poses no problem.

 

Yes, it's a bit flimsy, but the wibbly-wobbly-ness of it is part of the Doctor Who charm. Other works of fiction dealing with time travel try too hard to establish rigid rules about it and end up writing themselves into plotholes; in Doctor Who there can be no plotholes because the nature of time doesn't adhere to strict rules. We're not meant to think too hard about it, we're just meant to accept the facts as we're told them, and the fact in this case is that the Doctor is cut off from Rory and Amy's timeline. In fact I think Moffat is one of the best at writing timey-wimey stuff and making it believable.

 

Actually if River could never see them again, maybe they'd have shown her more distraught?

 

Nah, she rarely shows too much emotion.

[Serebii]

A friend spoiled this for me, so I thought I'd spoil you. A certain enemy has been redesigned

 

The Cybermen have a new look, back to the original Cybermen rather than the ones from the alternate reality. They're going to be in the episode written by Neil Gaiman in the second half

 

[Ashley]

in Doctor Who there can be no plotholes because the nature of time doesn't adhere to strict rules.

 

I assume you meant to say "the whole mythos is a plot hole and we're just supposed to accept it".

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

[Ashley]

Yes, my exact face when they try and blabber their way out of plot holes

[LegoMan1031]

Not sure if this is classed as a spoiler or not but I have been reading on twitter an actor who we 'might' all know is filming for an episode of doctor who.

 

Been reading tweets from Warwick Davies who has said he is filming at the moment for Doctor Who! He is involved in the ep who is named in the enemy spoiler a bit further up.

 

[Hamishmash]

Yeah the episode is the penultimate episode of the next run and is called The Last Cybermen and also stars Jason Watkins who is brilliant in Being Human and Psychoville. It is set on a mysterious planet which is rumoured to be an abandoned amusement park.

[Serebii]

Special prequel and a new trailer to the Christmas episode to air in Children in Need on Friday

[Serebii]

Prequel

 

 

Trailer for Christmas

 

[Ashley]

"The snow is feeding off your thoughts"

 

[Agent Gibbs]

Damn Moon****

[Cube]

Ooh, it's that Victorian lesbian lizard woman detective who eats serial killers and can do amazing things with her tongue.

[Serebii]

Another of those movie-style posters, this time for the Christmas episode

 

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

I really like the look they're going for with this.

[Serebii]

Confirmed for Christmas Day at the ridiculously early time of 5:15

[david.dakota]

Confirmed for Christmas Day at the ridiculously early time of 5:15

 

Or as my father would say "the proper time".

[Agent Gibbs]

Does anyone else think Robert Lyndsay would make an excellent Doctor? i'm loving him in Spy lately and wondered when we get a 12th Doctor surely they'd go older again, i think its the suit that makes me think Doctor when i look at him

[Cube]

The mention of an older Doctor suddenly conjured an image in my mind of Sir Ian McKellen in the TARDIS (he's way too popular for the role, though).

 

Sir Ian McKellen as The Doctor with Sir Patrick Stewart as the reborn Master.

[Agent Gibbs]

The mention of an older Doctor suddenly conjured an image in my mind of Sir Ian McKellen in the TARDIS (he's way too popular for the role, though).

 

Sir Ian McKellen as The Doctor with Sir Patrick Stewart as the reborn Master.

 

GOD LORD that level of awesome would destroy the world!

[Serebii]

Got another big spoiler, from the same friend who I will destroy...but figured I'll let you guys get spoiled

 

The TARDIS interior gets a redesign again. A glimpse of part of it has been shown

 

 

We know why it was done, since they've completely moved where they film the show, and the old set is not exactly able to be dismantled and rebuilt there easily for use without destruction, but I'll miss the current one

 

[Cube]

Hmm....

 

Does anyone get the feeling that this is the start of a whole new chapter of Doctor Who?

 

Amy and Rory were written pretty tightly into the plot of the show - a lot of it was probably more about them than The Doctor, and lots of the big events were about them and their daughter - actually, the River Song plot is nicely dealt with, so they could confine her to offscreen/book/audiobook adventures if they wanted to (although I do expect her to have one or two episodes over the next few years, but not as entwined with the plot as recently).

 

They also spent a while removing the "Doctor is a God" thing they had going with Tennant, with the "fake death" and him removing references of himself, the Daleks forgetting him and all that.

 

Then there's also the new companion, although a lot is still speculation - we'll probably find out more at Christmas.

 

I hope that this time, she's simply a "normal" person. Just a Victorian girl who was in the right place, at the right time. It would also provide an interesting change to have no companions from present day Earth.

 

While I loved Amy, I wouldn't want another companion so connected to events so soon.

 

[Serebii]

The mention of an older Doctor suddenly conjured an image in my mind of Sir Ian McKellen in the TARDIS (he's way too popular for the role, though).

 

Sir Ian McKellen as The Doctor with Sir Patrick Stewart as the reborn Master.

Funny you should mention that

http://doctorwhotv.co.uk/ian-mckellen-voicing-the-snowmen-42820.htm