Serebii Posted September 27, 2012 Posted September 27, 2012 Totally loved that episode and all the little nods like the charger, stetson etc I also agree with the comments above now further to my previously spoilerd speculation.... The conversation with Brian about what happened to the previous companions Is nobody else thinking they are hinting death now? i mean come on they lingered on death of companions and then Brian told him to keep them safe or words to that effect I'm placing my bets now, at least one of them will die, and since we had Rory died so much last season i'm betting its the girl who waited It's the Weeping Angels though. They kill kindly (except those who were desperate to survive last time) by sending people back in time, but yeah...I'm betting they'll die
Grazza Posted September 28, 2012 Posted September 28, 2012 I thought The Power of Three was brilliant - the best Matt Smith episode so far and the best episode in general for many, many years. What impressed me most was the tone - it was perfect. Warm-hearted but not too sentimental. Flawless by all reasonable criteria, although when Mark Williams saw the nurses in the corridor I really wanted him to say "You ain't seen me, right?"!
Serebii Posted September 29, 2012 Posted September 29, 2012 That was an amazingly touching episode, showed a part of the first episode we thought was Amy dreaming wasn't Amy dreaming at all, it went full circle. Brilliant
Daft Posted September 29, 2012 Posted September 29, 2012 I wish they'd not used the weeping angels again. Thought the episode was okay. They managed to escape and then oh no random angel survived...for no reason that makes any sense other than the writers needed it to happen. The more I think about it the more forced that episode felt. Disappointing.
Dcubed Posted September 29, 2012 Posted September 29, 2012 A perfect ending all in all. Touching and bitter sweet - with some beautiful time travel/space time continuum screwey uppery (resulting in a brilliant double set of twists at the end that stand as some of the series' best!) Nothing like a good Moffat episode!
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted September 29, 2012 Posted September 29, 2012 Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, brilliant! One of the best episodes full stop! So amazingly touching. Rory and Amy really went out with their best sides showing. I loved how they both died twice (and Rory once more for good measure - it's even become a running joke to them as well ), yet they got their happy ending. Moffat never lied, yet he still didn't tell the truth! It was great how we had no idea if the paradox would actually reset their deaths, and I actually sort of expected they'd die on that pavement together. Luckily they didn't! Also, I'm a bit proud to say I actually called them being stuck in the past without the Doctor being able to get them; in fact the whole episode was a brilliant callback to "Blink" wherein the two would-be lovers were separated in time and the young girl sat with the guy as he died of old age in a bed. In that episode the Doctor was similarly prevented from going back. The New York setting was brilliant, the plot was written perfectly, and the ending with little Amelia hearing the TARDIS was such a beautiful wrap-up. Tears were shed. Also, does anyone suspect he might keep Amy's glasses to go with the new gentlemanly attire we've seen in the promo shot with the new companion?
The Peeps Posted September 29, 2012 Posted September 29, 2012 Really feels like these episodes just aren't long enough to fit in the storylines they want to do.
LegoMan1031 Posted September 30, 2012 Posted September 30, 2012 Very touching episode. A great way to see off the end of the Ponds. Grown quite attached to them!
Retro_Link Posted September 30, 2012 Posted September 30, 2012 I'm not really sure what I thought of it, not sure it was the type of ending I wanted to see (though I'm not sure what that would have been). It didn't feel like a happy ending to me... I know it doesn't have to, that's part of being The Doctor companion, but it felt they wrote it as one, and I'm surprised you felt 'they got their happy ending' @Dannyboy\-the\-Dane. Yes they were together but it was all making the best out of a pretty terrible situation. I enjoyed setting and the locations within the episode, they really allowed the angels to shine, more so than that planet episode. I thought The Statue of Liberty angel was stupid though. Angel's aren't ALL statues, and that really did feel like one too far. Concept was a good one too. I thought the 'suicide' angle was a bit much, and I didn't think that would be the way they would go out for that reason. I think it should have been a two parter really, as again it felt a bit rushed. Can't see The Doctor keeping Amy's glasses; other than maybe in name (occasionally) they always move on from past companions and don't use reminders like that. Ultimately I think I'll be glad of a change of companion. Don't think I've really been a fan of Amy and Rory... and River (also that 'mother' and kiss on Amy's hand was wierdly creepy), despite some good moments, it always felt like I was trying to like them.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted September 30, 2012 Posted September 30, 2012 Well, they lived out their lives together. That's a lot more happy than what I dared hope for with the comments made by Steven Moffat.
Serebii Posted September 30, 2012 Posted September 30, 2012 I enjoyed setting and the locations within the episode, they really allowed the angels to shine, more so than that planet episode. I thought The Statue of Liberty angel was stupid though. Angel's aren't ALL statues, and that really did feel like one too far. Concept was a good one too. Well they did explain that. They said that they became all the statues...they changed into it, and presumably changed back when things were unwritten
Retro_Link Posted September 30, 2012 Posted September 30, 2012 Well they did explain that. They said that they became all the statues...they changed into it, and presumably changed back when things were unwrittenSo what are the angels then, I thought they were a race... how can just suddenly become all types of statue? Also they didn't show that very well in the episode then. Like when Rory was walking back with the coffee, only one of the 4 Cherub statues left the fountian.
Cube Posted September 30, 2012 Posted September 30, 2012 I really enjoyed the ending. I was thinking the suicide angle was a little bit too strong, so the more pleasant way to go (living out their lives) makes it both a happy and sad ending. My only complaint would be the Statue of Liberty. That wasn't really explained, it didn't really do much in the story. It was as though they just felt that they had to do something with it because it was set in New York. They should have ditched that and put it in Los Angeles instead. other than maybe in name (occasionally) they always move on from past companions and don't use reminders like that. Huh? One of the big problems with RTD's era is that they couldn't move on from past companions and all of them returned - most of them multiple times.
Jamba Posted September 30, 2012 Posted September 30, 2012 I'm really, REALLY not liking the writing at the moment. The last episode felt really clumsy to me and the script is driving me insane lately as some of the lines are complete cack. "He's you..." for example. I'm finding the characterisation to be so inconsistent that I've lost touch emotionally with any of the characters or their developments not to mention that the current Doctor seems to be so childish that he's bordering on being completely obnoxious. I liked the concept of the building and it's cyclical nature but the delivery has just been all over the place.
Grazza Posted September 30, 2012 Posted September 30, 2012 Just watched "Angels Take Manhattan". I thought it was very good in terms of music and photography - both created a very strong, sombre atmosphere. I didn't actually enjoy the episode much, and this is where I get on my own nerves when I talk about Steven Moffat's writing. There is nothing constructive I can say whatsoever. He is extraordinarily talented and intelligent, and there are no suggestions I can give that would improve the script. His stories are always darker and/or sadder than the others - even one of his most popular episodes, Blink, stood out like a sore thumb, tonally-speaking, in the mostly-bombastic Series 3, whereas I much preferred Russell T. Davies' Judoon and the wonderful "I AM THE MASTER!" moment. I just have to accept his style is not my sort of thing. Angels Take Manhattan was classic Moffat. It was dark, it was sad, it featured complicated time travel mechanics (although I suppose you're always going to get that with the Weeping Angels). It reminded me of the Silence two-parter from last year, actually. Overall, it really was a good mini-series. All five episodes were pretty decent, in my opinion, with the best being Chris Chibnall's "The Power Of Three". I didn't think Doctor Who could become that good again, but it did (briefly). With a new companion, Steven Moffat seemingly becoming more accomplished as a head writer and - most importantly - some excellent secondary writers finding their feet, I feel Doctor Who is on an upward trajectory.
Agent Gibbs Posted September 30, 2012 Posted September 30, 2012 I don't know how i felt about that episode.... on the one hand it was a very good episode and on face value a good way to write out the Ponds without killing them (so they wouldn't return) However there a bits that were off, the whole statue of liberty thing! when they panned around new york and showed the statue (not long after that gangsta bloke had commented on them being everywhere), i thought oh god please don't be so cheesy and random as to make the statue an angel, because how would that not have a single set of eyes on it at any one time?! then not more than a few min later, oh look the statue of liberty is in the middle of Manhatten in an odd pose over a building....that felt just plain terrible but other bits were thought out and powerful like the suicide and that was just perfect for them two. I still feel cheated by the ending though, they were looking to leave, they were aging and almost told the Doctor goodbye in the cube episode. Then Moffat brings out this sucker punch and traps them in the past of new york, sure its "happy" that they are together.....in the past......in a foreign country......with no documentation/money.....away from all the family....with no hope of ever being rescued......because the angel conveniently sent them to the same time the doctor couldn't visit....so happy. I still aren't clear on that not being able to visit 1930 bit, was that just Manhatten in 1930 or all of 1930 ever again? because if its just Manhatten in 1930 surely he could go to new jersey and have them meet him..... and if its all of 1930 i'll be interested to see if that ever gets forgotten and they end up in the 30's someplace again I'm not ashamed to say it brought a tear to my eye, but when i thought about it i felt a little like it was rushed and full of holes and a lack of explanation why couldn't it have been a two-parter? why couldn't a lot have been two-parters? and have it seem less rushed?
Grazza Posted September 30, 2012 Posted September 30, 2012 I still aren't clear on that not being able to visit 1930 bit, was that just Manhatten in 1930 or all of 1930 ever again? because if its just Manhatten in 1930 surely he could go to new jersey and have them meet him..... I loved that, brilliant! I'm not taking the mickey, it really is a good point. Had River Song said that to the Doctor, it would have drastically improved my enjoyment of the episode! If only Captain Jack was still in it; he probably would have!
Cube Posted September 30, 2012 Posted September 30, 2012 I still aren't clear on that not being able to visit 1930 bit, was that just Manhatten in 1930 or all of 1930 ever again? because if its just Manhatten in 1930 surely he could go to new jersey and have them meet him.....and if its all of 1930 i'll be interested to see if that ever gets forgotten and they end up in the 30's someplace again The "not being able to visit Manhattan 1938" is a different reason to why he can't rescue the Ponds - if he rescued them it would create another paradox on top of the one already existing, which would cause problems. I think he could go and see them, but he knows he couldn't resist the urge to take them off on another adventure if he did, and he can't risk that happening on account that New York would explode. River doesn't have that problem, so she can visit them (as she does after writing the book). So she was probably able to set them up with what they needed.
The Peeps Posted September 30, 2012 Posted September 30, 2012 Or why not just go to NY 1939... I don't know what the paradox is... they destroyed the original building but I guess that angel sent them back and started it up all over again? So really the angels still need to be dealt with?
Agent Gibbs Posted September 30, 2012 Posted September 30, 2012 Love that comic! its perfect surely he could let them live there for a year too and then collect them in 1931... I just don't like the answer of "paradox" for not being able to collect them from a different place, or a year later, i mean they survived the creation of a universe, and have been living paradoxes themselves, surely a train ride or being late aren't going to hurt.... but yeah its Doctor who so yeah thats the "answer" i just wanted them to live at home with Arthur's Dad and live happily, i'd like to think that thy would have visited their family at some point if they were stranded
Cube Posted September 30, 2012 Posted September 30, 2012 Well, in about 30 years they could find their daughter and raise her before sending her off to go to school in Leadworth.
LegoMan1031 Posted October 1, 2012 Posted October 1, 2012 I don't know if the lightblub references actually mean anything but there was another one in this ep... If I remember right River asked him if the lightbulb needed changing on the TARDIS but the doctor said he had already done so. Also River told him she is now a professor... could we be nearing the end of her storyline (since she was a professor in the library). Which also brings me to my next super wild theory... the lights going out, could it not be the vasta narada (or how ever you spell it)? As they were referenced in the library ep which was a moffat one to spread the darkness or something so they can eat more people!
bryanee Posted October 1, 2012 Posted October 1, 2012 Good episode but thank god the Pond's are gone, I couldnt stand them.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted October 1, 2012 Posted October 1, 2012 When Rory read his tombstone, it became fixed in time that he'd die and be buried there at age 82, hence Amy's only chance of living out her life with him was to be zapped back there with him. They were then bound to that time and place, and since there'd already been so many mixed timelines and a paradox on top of that, no time traveller would ever be able to change that or even visit them without blowing up New York. Basically it's not explicitly stated or concluded that they can't leave New York or get visitors from another time, but from the context I would say we're meant to infer as much. It's almost like their timeline is locked off from the rest of the world, sort of like the Time War. But I'm obviously not completely certain. Wibbly wobbly etc. Anyway, to further confuse matters, River said something interesting while washing the TARDIS with the Doctor shortly before Rory got zapped back: River: "So ... Rory and Amy, then ..." Doctor: "Yes, I know, I know ..." River: "I'm just saying ...! They're gonna get terribly bored hanging around here all day." I'm not aware that there was supposed to be any fixed points then, so what does River mean? Their whole conversation is rather curious to me; what are they talking about?
Serebii Posted October 1, 2012 Posted October 1, 2012 When Rory read his tombstone, it became fixed in time that he'd die and be buried there at age 82, hence Amy's only chance of living out her life with him was to be zapped back there with him. They were then bound to that time and place, and since there'd already been so many mixed timelines and a paradox on top of that, no time traveller would ever be able to change that or even visit them without blowing up New York. Basically it's not explicitly stated or concluded that they can't leave New York or get visitors from another time, but from the context I would say we're meant to infer as much. It's almost like their timeline is locked off from the rest of the world, sort of like the Time War. But I'm obviously not completely certain. Wibbly wobbly etc. Anyway, to further confuse matters, River said something interesting while washing the TARDIS with the Doctor shortly before Rory got zapped back: River: "So ... Rory and Amy, then ..." Doctor: "Yes, I know, I know ..." River: "I'm just saying ...! They're gonna get terribly bored hanging around here all day." I'm not aware that there was supposed to be any fixed points then, so what does River mean? Their whole conversation is rather curious to me; what are they talking about? The fact that they're just sitting around painting the TARDIS while Amy & Rory are sat around. Simple as.
Recommended Posts