Doctor Who

[Kestra15]

I was really disappointed in the last episode. It just idn't have that spark, and the plot was a little confusing. The nexxt episode looks promising, though. c:

A similar idea, it suffered from mid-season sag. But I still enjoyed it well enough.

 

EDIT:

 

So, 'The Power of Three.' Thoughts?

 

I personally thought it was good, and heart-warming. We all know how the Doctor feels about Amy and Rory, but to have it stated so bluntly, on-screen, was lovely to see.

 

The only thing that upset me was how they used the defibrillator. But I'll let that slide.

 

And I can not wait for the Angels. It looks like they're even worse than ever before...

Edited September 23, 2012 by Kestra15

[_Charky]

The only thing that upset me was how they used the defibrillator. But I'll let that slide.

Eh?

 

__________________________

 

 

I've seen a lot of people complaining about how the plot was resolved so quickly... I get that, I even agree with it to a certain degree, but does it really always have to be about the resloving of the problem? Maybe this episode was MEANT to be more about the background of it than the fixing...

 

 

Also, I want a slightly less deadly version of the black cubes o3o

[Kestra15]

They did say the idea of the episode was to show life from the view of the Ponds - and I think that has been the strength of the Eleventh Doctor so far. It's not all about the sci-fi element, even though it should be prominent and in my opinion handled very well. It's also about the human element - and I don't mean some drawn-out love-affair between Doctor and companion *coughRoseMarthcough* I mean how the Doctor affects those around them, what his life and lifestyle does to them - and most of all, it's good to see the Doctor is sometimes as human as us. He keeps coming back to the Ponds time and again, simply due to one thing; he loves them. They are his friends, his family.

 

[AngelicDemise]

Finally, I found the topic!

 

 

My favorite episode is empty child. When I showed it to my friends they all screamed >W<

 

 

 

I really want a sonic screwdriver. REALLY. BAD.

 

 

 

Well, not that bad though.

On BBC they only show it at like, 4:00, 9:00, and 11:00.

 

 

I always miss it. >M<

 

For you. >.>

[NixAyum]

And I can not wait for the Angels. It looks like they're even worse than ever before...

Did you see the one spoiler shot of the Statue of Liberty Angel?

 

More River Song in this one too! There's a theory going around that River is pregnant, mostly based on the "feeling sick around the Silence" that Amy had. Not sure if want.

[DarkEternity]

There are more spoilers than you'd ever need for DW on Gallifrey Base under '2012 - Series 7 - Spoiler Summary' and "On Location" Fan Reports. I'm a diehard spoiler fan.

[Kestra15]

Did you see the one spoiler shot of the Statue of Liberty Angel?

 

More River Song in this one too! There's a theory going around that River is pregnant, mostly based on the "feeling sick around the Silence" that Amy had. Not sure if want.

Doubt she is. And I did see the adverts too...creepy stuff ahead!

 

I can't see it until Monday, since Amerylis is going to be up then and wants us to watch it together.

[clara954]

I just saw the dubbed Hetalia movie and there was a Doctor Who reference in it. Hilarious!

[Moonlight_Eevee]

Saw the new episode last night, it made me both love the ending and hated it at the same time. It drove me bonkers.

[Jedi40]

I felt the same way when I saw the ending. One thing that really bothered me was if Rory could survive 2000 years and not age a day how could he age and die as a old man in this episode?

[Moonlight_Eevee]

I felt the same way when I saw the ending. One thing that really bothered me was if Rory could survive 2000 years and not age a day how could he age and die as a old man in this episode?

That is a good point you have. I don't have the answer to that, but it did cross my mind when I was watching it.

[Dr. Paine]

That is a good point you have. I don't have the answer to that, but it did cross my mind when I was watching it.

Wasn't he part of the Nestine Consciousness then? Living plastic and all?

[Moonlight_Eevee]

He was, but I guess when the Doctor reset the universe, I'm guessing that Rory went back to being human and not plastic.

[NixAyum]

Wasn't he part of the Nestine Consciousness then? Living plastic and all?

Yep. The Doctor even said something about because he was plastic he would never be able to sleep for the 2k years.

 

Angels Take Manhattan made me cry.

[Moonlight_Eevee]

Although, I did love it when they were on the roof and they turned around to see The Weeping Angel of Liberty I call it.

[Jedi40]

Wasn't he part of the Nestine Consciousness then? Living plastic and all?

Yes but he still never aged and when they married he said he was still plastic so I am unhappy with what happened in this episode has it left to many unanswered questions up in the air. Anyone know Moffit's email addy?

[Kestra15]

I felt the same way when I saw the ending. One thing that really bothered me was if Rory could survive 2000 years and not age a day how could he age and die as a old man in this episode?

Because he was human. He was plastic only in the original time-line; when it came to him being married to Amy, he was human again.

 

I loved that episode. If you think about it - nobody died, in a way. Yes, they went back in time - to be together, and live the rest of their lives naturally with one another. Happily. And the implication was that Amy and Rory were getting old anyway - the lines on Amy's face, her reading glasses, Rory looked older too. They had maybe fifteen years of travels with the Doctor altogether, as well as seeing their daughter grow up and have adventures with them, and then they settled down and lived a happily ever after.

 

It's the best ending you can get for a companion.

 

So, thank you Moffatt. Seriously.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Kestra15

[_Charky]

I'm glad this episode was like it was, because I honestly don't think people can complain about that one like they have with the others. I don't even think that they can start with the "river is such a mary sue, blablabla" bit, because it showed shes just as vulnerable as the next guy.

 

also, I didn't cry. In fact, I nearly cried because I have to wait until christmas for the next one, rather than the sad The only thing keeping me going is the fact that merlin is on in its place.

[Cori]

Angels of Manhatten was......okay. Better than some, at least. But still not that good. There were too many things that bothered me about it.

If 'anything with the image of an angel is an angel', then what would be done about the millions of Statue of Liberty photos, toys, and miniatures?? They would all be angels too!

 

Honestly it feels like Moffat only made the Statue an angel because he thought it was 'cool' and didn't stop to think about how he was actually going to make the whole thing work.

Like if you're going to do something on a large scale like this then you had BETTER BE REALLY THOROUGH. Otherwise you just seem lazy. And Moffat has never seemed lazier than he does now.

 

The thing that ticks me off the most about this episode: Moffat has written four episodes with the angels in them, and each time they've reappeared he's proceeded to break his OWN RULES about how they work!!

 

Continuity, what's that?

 

All in all this episode was just really kind of disappointing.

 

 

Also, River Song's little comment about "never let him see your damage" was AWFUL. Moffat says he's not sexist but then he turns around and reduces women to objects and common personality cliches.

[Kestra15]

Also, River Song's little comment about "never let him see your damage" was AWFUL. Moffat says he's not sexist but then he turns around and reduces women to objects and common personality cliches.

...what? Sorry, now it looks like you're just looking to find offence.

 

That's not sexism. The whole episode makes continually references to how the Doctor cannot handle loss, and it is long established he doesn't like reminders of how humans are far less durable than him, that they live and die and he just keeps on living. I can't see how that is a sexist remark; River's pointing out that the Doctor just can't handle being reminded of the mortality of those he loves. So no, not sexism at all.

 

I do agree with the Statue to an extent though - I think he was going for 'Rule of Cool' about having the Statue as an Angel. But as for 'the image of an Angel...' - I think that's more the fridge horror of the episode. The same way in 'Silence in the Library' we all started to fear the dark a bit more, that in 'Blink' he made us realise that statues could be cold-blooded killers, now we're worried that all those nice postcards from the USA might just be Angels waiting to jump out on us...

 

So no, no contradiction of canon there. Just magnifying how dangerous these Angels are.

[Cori]

...what? Sorry, now it looks like you're just looking to find offence.

 

That's not sexism. The whole episode makes continually references to how the Doctor cannot handle loss, and it is long established he doesn't like reminders of how humans are far less durable than him, that they live and die and he just keeps on living. I can't see how that is a sexist remark; River's pointing out that the Doctor just can't handle being reminded of the mortality of those he loves. So no, not sexism at all.

No, I'm not looking for something to take offense to. Moffat's been forcing junk like this through his whole time as the show's writer. His writing is very problematic to me. Every female character he's written has turned into a tired cliche. Amy and River's entire lives revolve around the Doctor. Amy tried to go out and do something on her own by becoming a model, and as we saw in 'Asylum' that was very short-lived. I've never seen Amy or River doing anything on their own without the Doctor looming over them, getting ready to bail them out. Every time they've appeared, the Doctor's had to rescue them! They've never once made a decision based on their own thoughts and wishes (the exception to this would be 'The Girl Who Waited', and Amy was only forced to make her own decisions there because she was stranded for THIRTY YEARS).

 

And yes, I know that it's been explained in the show why their lives revolve around him. That doesn't make me any happier. Any author can cover a plot hole with some paper and tape, but that doesn't mean it's not there anymore.

 

Also, River threatened to let the whole world be destroyed if the Doctor didn't marry her. That's...not very rational thinking. More like hysterical.

 

Besides, Moffat's been portraying Amy as sex appeal ever since she was introduced. He basically turned her into the incubator for his next big plot point. Sometimes it seems like the only reason Amy and Rory were introduced into the story at ALL was so they could make River Song, Moffat's super special wonderbaby.

 

And while I'm on the subject of Amy and Rory, I have to say that I'm a bit upset that Rory was kind of tossed to the wayside several times. It seems like he's been ignored a lot in favor of playing up Amy and River more. I'd easily compare him to Mickey, from the 9th Doctor's era, who also deserved more screentime than he got.

 

I'd be less upset with Moffat if he actually showed any interest in the opinions and concerns that some of his fans have voiced. But as soon as he hears any sort of criticism, he rolls up into a ball and ignores all of it. I can't stand people who think they are immune to criticism--you could be one of the greatest writers in the world, but if you refused to acknowledge that someone thinks you made a mistake, then you're going to start alienating your fanbase. Moffat doesn't even TRY to understand other points of view.

 

Moffat's said some questionable things about women in various interviews, too. His personal viewpoints of women have cropped up in Doctor Who all the time. Sherlock, too, but I know less about that show.

 

Anyway. That's my two cents on the matter.

 

[DarkEternity]

Besides, Moffat's been portraying Amy as sex appeal ever since she was introduced. He basically turned her into the incubator for his next big plot point. Sometimes it seems like the only reason Amy and Rory were introduced into the story at ALL was so they could make River Song, Moffat's super special wonderbaby.

This.

 

Moffat's said some questionable things about women in various interviews, too. His personal viewpoints of women have cropped up in Doctor Who all the time. Sherlock, too, but I know less about that show.

That would be this:

Well, the world is vastly counted in favour of men at every level - except if you live in a civilised country and you’re sort of educated and middle-class, because then you’re almost certainly junior in your relationship and in a state of permanent, crippled apology. Your preferences are routinely mocked. There’s a huge, unfortunate lack of respect for anything male. -Moffat

 

And this:

There’s this issue you’re not allowed to discuss: that women are needy. Men can go for longer, more happily, without women. That’s the truth. We don’t, as little boys, play at being married – we try to avoid it for as long as possible. Meanwhile women are out there hunting for husbands.” -Moffat

Edited October 4, 2012 by DarkEternity

[_Charky]

If you're going to watch the show to pick fault with it, either do so elsewhere or don't watch it at all.

[Cori]

If you're going to watch the show to pick fault with it, either do so elsewhere or don't watch it at all.

I'm not watching Doctor Who to pick fault at it. I love the show.

 

And the 'don't like, don't look' argument is the poorest way for someone to shrug away a criticism. It's not a clever rebuke. It's rude. I hate it when someone takes one side-glance at a critique and then tosses it to the wayside like that.

 

The reason I'm being so critical towards what Moffat is doing is because I KNOW what the show has been capable of in the past and I know how wonderful it can be sometimes. Moffat is making changes that I do not like, and some changes are downright offensive--offensive to my intelligence and offensive to me, personally, because he's classified women as 'needy'--among other rude adjectives.

 

And the reason I'm posting my opinions on here is because this is the 'Doctor Who' discussion thread. It's for discussion. That includes critiques and concerns. I'm not breaking any rules by posting criticism for a show in a thread about the show in question.

[satyr76]

Personally, I enjoy most of Moffat's writing, and I don't feel that Amy and River are portrayed in a sexist manner at all. However, I do agree that those comments are sexist, and they made me lose a ton of respect for him.