 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After The Day Of The Doctor, where he wrote an episode that casual viewers would be able to follow, Moffat basically uses this last one to tie up loose ends and plot strands that have been left loose for (in some cases) years... Moffat caters more to the hard core geeks of the show then even RTD did. But it does mean that as arcs continue the show has become near impenetrable for someone who just occasionally wants to watch an episode of Who.
On the one hand I was pleased to see the cracks in the universe and the exploding TARDIS finally explained. On the other hand, It's a few years later. How relevant is it still? In that way it reminded me of the final two parter of BSG, that rather obviously tied everything together at the last moment.
I would have preferred if this was done gradually. instead of leaving every series with yet another unsolved puzzle
I loved the acting, I loved the comedy (I'm sorry guys, Doctor Who will always remain a children's show at heart).
As for the comment that it has 30 minutes of ideas spread over 90. As usual with Moffat's writings it has 90 minutes of writing crammed in less then an hour. I love complex plotting, but give my brain a time to think....
I have a sneaking suspicion that Moffat created the War Doctor partially so he could move up the Regenerations one extra step and he would be the one doing the solution to the regeneration limit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i disagree. It simply would not be Doctor Who.
Fans should just accept that they are watching a show which also aims at a younger audience, and has done so for 50 yeats. Lots of shows dealing with "dark" and adult themes already.
Actually Who also does that, The Time War, death, genocide etc. but in a way that its younger viewers can also deal with.
I became a fan of the show in part because of its style. Why would inwant that to change.
Just watch Sherlock if you dont like Who, its in many ways a similar show.
|
|
|
|
|
|
i disagree. It simply would not be Doctor Who.
Fans should just accept that they are watching a show which also aims at a younger audience, and has done so for 50 yeats. Lots of shows dealing with "dark" and adult themes already.
Actually Who also does that, The Time War, death, genocide etc. but in a way that its younger viewers can also deal with.
Totally right. He must never degenerate to a macho character or a primarily sexual one. It was always for children primarily.
And it certainly deals with the 'dark' stuff, but in a way that needs to be optimistic. Who is a redeemer, and a Hermes figure who tricks evil out of existence and goes gack in loops to redeem the past and build other universes where stuff is better. It has all the big philosophical, religious, scientific, cosmological themes, but there's always a laughing God behind it all who just needs found. You can do all that (didn't C.S. Lewis?), and still make it kiddy friendly. It's a kiddies' 'join the dots' or 'Find the hidden stuff' puzzle in TV format, a kids' guide to transcendentalism. It's only a matter of time before some loony brands it as 'Satanic'.
Anyway, when Hollywood says 'adult' it always means 'adolescent' really. They seem to think if a hero stands with his legs apart, and gets his gun out on the table, he's 'adult'. That's just adolescents WANTING to be adult, no more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The problem I am seeing isn't that it needs to be "more adult". The problem is that the story lines are a jumbled mess. They need to take a little more time to develop things. There is no reason that they can't have both action and whizz-bang as well as a more cohesive background plot.
Yes, the plots move so fast that you need to revisit them to get what's going on. That's a no-no in conventional wisdom.
But I'm increasingly of the opinion that this is deliberate. You have to go back to see more. That's why I think they're trying a new approach, it's to normal narrative as 3D chess is to 2D chess.
In the future there'll probably be hologram television, where the viewer steps into stuff. Narrative is going to change then, and this looks like it's moving in that direction. But only in a very SUCCESSFUL show with a track record could they try this. If Dr. who were a new phenomenon, people probably wouldn't watch it, it'd be too confusing.
Plus, if you have to rewatch the thing to understand it, it means good box-set sales!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Dec 27, 2013 - 6:45 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
johnjohnson
(Member)
|
i disagree. It simply would not be Doctor Who.
Fans should just accept that they are watching a show which also aims at a younger audience, and has done so for 50 yeats. Lots of shows dealing with "dark" and adult themes already.
Actually Who also does that, The Time War, death, genocide etc. but in a way that its younger viewers can also deal with.
I became a fan of the show in part because of its style. Why would inwant that to change.
Just watch Sherlock if you dont like Who, its in many ways a similar show.
It's an interesting article to read nonetheless. The writer was trying to suggest with the arrival of Peter Capaldi, perhaps it's time for monsters such as The Daleks need to be more scary, and put the kids hiding behind the sofa once more. After all, that where kids used to watch it. lol. As for the reboot series, I admit, I'm not a big fan of nuWho. If there's something there I like, I'll say so. On the whole, it's nothing more than a mild curiosity. My real interest in show remains during the 1963-1989 period. I'm hoping that may change with an older Doctor. It's about time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I watched it a second time and liked it a lot more. This time focusing on story and less on performance. (Which I thought Matt and Jenna were excellent).
While there is some clarity the fact remains I can't solve major plot holes:
Well here is my take on some of them.
(1) When the Doctor arrives at the unknown planet he is told it is Gallifrey.
(2) Later on he is told the planet is Trenzalore. From that point forward it is Trenzalore.
I assumed the Cyberman head read the readings coming from the crack in space and time rather then the planet that was physically there. Same as all the aliens, which is why they assembled there.
(3) We find out the Time Lords open the crack in the Universe. First episode of series 5. (Introduction of Amy) Because as we now know after the 50th special, Gallifrey is not gone but trapped in another universe. The Time Lords opened a crack and was calling out to the Doctor so they would know they found the right universe to return too.
That is correct. Is there a question there?
What I didn't understand is that according to The Day Of The Doctor Gallifrey would be trapped in a single moment in time. I assume this means that it and everyone on it would be frozen in that one instant.
(4) The Church group, (what ever their name was or their leader) got to this planet first and put a force field around it so none of the aliens could attack it. The Doctor stayed on the planet for the protection of himself and the people from the Cyberrmen, Darleks etc). If he answered the question Doctor Who, the Time lords would come through the crack and another Time War would start. Which is what the Church group was trying to prevent. But for some reason from time to time different aliens were able to sneak onto the planet despite the force field. Whom the Doctor fought off time and again.
Narration states that his enemies founds ways to adapt and occasionally breach the forcefield, like the wooden Cyberman. There's tradition in Doctor Who of wood being able to beat sophisticated technology because it's so simple.
(5) But, the Darleks eventually tricked the Doctor. They took over the Church ship and masqueraded as it's inhabitants. The Church leader was really a Darlek, looking like herself with some of her own consciousness left in her. This is why after capturing him she helped him to escape again.
Yes. I dont understand how this is a plot home. apart from the fact that they didnt lower the forcefield.
(6) What did Clara say to convince the Time Lords they found the Doctor they were looking for? They sent through 12 new regenerations for the Doctor. So if that is the case, and they are now convinced they found the right universe why didn't the Time Lords come through the crack?
That's a big one indeed. It doenst seem to add up. I assume they wanna make the search for Gallifrey a big plot line for the next Doctor, But there doesnt seem to be a reason why Gallifrey didnt appear at that point.
(7) The Darleks could not get the Church leader to turn off the force field for an all out attack. Yet from this point forward this is what happened. All the enemies were able to "land" on the planet and attack Christmas village. So it made no sense for the Doctor not to say his name and let the Time Lords through as there was an all out war anyway.
If he had said his name he believed Gallifrey would have returned and then another Time War would happen. Worse then the war that was going on on Trenzelore.
But it still doesnt seem to make sense that Gallifrey didnt appear.
(8) While it was wonderful seeing Amy again, why did she reappear on the Tardis? What was the Doctor seeing? A hallucination? A vision the Tardis created so the Doctor could say goodbye?
Obviously a hallucination of some kind, either by the TARDIS or because he was dying. I believe Classic Doctors have had hallucinations like that.
(9) They never showed young Amy's face. Just her eyes. Either they could not get the actress back for the role and used a double or that was done on purpose for the big revealing of Karen as Amy. (Not sure which is the case)
The actress playing young Amy would have been a teenager now and probably doesn't resemble her younger self very much at this point.
The time lords not coming through the Crack seems to be by far the biggest hole (no pun intended) Though they might solve that with a throwaway line of dialogue in the next series.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree that the biggest problem of the series is not the stories, but the way they are written/filmed. So much crammed into 45 minutes, actors talking very fast giving vital plot info "on the go".
Ever since series 6 I've felt like they write for a 60 minute episode, then cut out 15 minutes.
Acting, the general look and tone of the film, the music is all top notch IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
River Song never wore black nailpolish. Usually she either wore clear or none. Only in Time Of Angels and The Angels Take Manhattan does she wear colored, and in both cases red.
Amy Pond has pretty much wore every colour in the rainbow during her time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seems I got some things right. And there are a few outstanding issues. Others were simple answers I didn't think of, like the little girl (Karen's real cousin btw) being to old for the part now. 