Doctor Who Series 6.13: "The Wedding of River Song' [SPOILERS] + Series wrap up

[Riesel87]

What an awful end to a truely awful series of Dr Who. Only the james cordon episode was really good, spoiled by Amy Pond's cameo. This series has been full of continuity errors, more retcons than you can count and the truely tiresom plot of Amy pond and river song. River song has been the most over used and underwhelming character to hit dr who. Poorly devised retcons to turn her into a central character, which just wouldnt end.

What retcons?

well making her amy and roreys daughter for one.
Making river that black girl who died for another.
making river song part timelord.

these are all retcons.

Those aren't retcons... they're plot developments.

No those are retcons. Discovering something never previously known about someone after the fact is called a retcon. Changing something about someone i.e introducing the black girl at the end, into amy and roreys past is retro active continuity. She was added after the fact, a retcon. I dont know how to explain that any better

Uhh...

Definition for retcon:
Retroactive continuity (often shortened to retcon) refers to the deliberate alteration of previously established facts in a work of serial fiction.

When was it an established fact that she WASN'T their daughter?
When was it an established fact Mels (that black girl as you put it) DIDN'T exist in their lives?
When was it an established fact that River WASN'T half TimeLord?

I'm sorry but your argument is retarded. What you are describing are developments of characters that have been revealed as and when the story required them to be known. Where would the suspense have been if River's entire fucking back story had been outlined in her first epsiode? She would have been completely pointless as a story telling device. Obviously your brain has trouble with plot twists, perhaps you should stick to watching something else.

Right first off, calm down and stop swearing. I havent been offensive to you so don't be offensive to me. If you being insulting to put your put across is your only way, then it shows your level of intellect for what it is.

I have admitted to someone else that these may not be technically retcons, but they are as close as without changing any so called established facts.

To believe that moffat had designs to make all these plot points with River song in mind, when she lay dying in the library seems rather unlikely. I cannot imagine he was writing plot points to go for characters 2 seasons ahead that hadnt even been written. The fact is river song as a character has been in dr who 3 seasons. Therefore somethings, like the sudden addition of mel as a plot point, is just moffat adding things as and when to make things fit with his new story. That reflects in the quality of programme, as dr who is ment to be thought provoking, but when you can see things like that being done it doesnt make for good watching.

It has made river a confused character, with sudden aditions to fit the new story. These are hardly thought provoking twists, adding random bits of information to a character that has dragged and ultimately fulfilled every expected outcome.

Say what you like about swearing being a reflection of someone's intellect, I think your spelling and grammar is more indicitive of feeble intelligence. I don't see how the utterance of the word 'fuck' suddenly means I'm stupid...

At the end of the day, you have no idea whatsoever what Moffat was planning so you have no grounds to complain and preach about so called retcons. You may very well be right, half of the things you described could have been major tricks pulled out the arse, so to speak, but again you don't know. Furthermore, to refer to them as retcons is grossly inaccurate. Whatever you may think of the writing or presentation, no established facts have been changed or altered in regards to the issues you raised.

Next time, a bit of reflection on what you're actually pissed off about might be in order before you start whining about retcons. (A google definition search wouldn't hurt either.)

I may have got the technical term incorrect, but at least I put a view foward. All you are doing is complaining about grammatical errors and corect use of techincal terms. As if I am going to spend any time checking that my spelling and grammar is perfect while on an internet forum. I also went on to admit that to call them retcons was not technically correct, however you continue to make the same redundent point.

You haven't made one point about the actual show itself, just to point out what I have labelled incorrectly. If it bothers you that much, then become an English teacher but spare me your judgement.

Also there is no right or wrong when it comes to an opinion. I have every right to complain about what I perceive to be poor screen writing. Based on logic, it seems likely that Moffat did not plan any of these things as far as 3 years ago, and is reflected in the quality of the last series. If Moffat comes out with documented proof of his master plan, then by all means come back and through it in my face, other wise my theory is valid.

If you would like to give an opinon on the show, rather than pointing out technicallities and errors of a grammatical nature then I would be happy to read them. Otherwise please troll somebody else!

 

[Hugga_Bear]

His name is Doc Tor Who, in case the fat blue guy didn't make it blatantly obvious enough. Shitty episode though.
"this is a fixed point in history, it can't be rewritten"
"Yes it can!"
*rewrites history*

'sigh'

No.
"This is a fixed point in history. It can't be altered".
This is a truth.

The question is; what is the fixed point?

The Doctor dying? No, the Doctor's presence there. They make it very obvious that a lot of effort went into ensuring the Doctor was present. His death is inconsequential, the sequence of events that occurred had to occur and couldn't occur any other way. It just wasn't the sequence we thought we were seeing.

The Doctor never died, he always lived. It just looked like he died from episode 1.

 

[ReservoirAngel]

How is survival not a motivation?

Okay I should have said "a plan" instead of a motivation. But they still don't have any solid villain motivation in logical terms, because they're not doing anything but what they need to.

Essentially, the Doctor kills them or traps them in their quantum lock forms forever, just because they... try to survive.

Actually you can apply that "All aliens bad except the Doctor" thing to the Silence too. In Day of the Moon, he raised humanity as an army against the Silence... but why? What were they doing? They were guiding humanity, that's it. Some would call it manipulating, yes. Yes they made us want to go the moon in the first place but it's never explained why they wanted that. If you take that episode, by itself... their greatest crime is one random member of them killing one random American woman in a Whitehouse toilet.

Nobody even noticed them so any harm they were even potentially doing is kind of negated since until the Doctor comes blundering in nobody noticed or gave a shit. They might have had nefarious intentions for the moon landing, but it's still never expanded upon. For all we know they wanted Armstrong to get to the moon because they wanted humanity inspired to reach out into deep space and spread across the stars.

Seriously, I dare anyone to go back. Watch the Series 6 2-part premiere and tell me, using only information from the episodes themselves, what the Silence's big evil plan was. I dare anyone to enlighten me because I sure as Hell can't find anything concrete against them.

 

[Freeze_L]

Very interesting episode. I think it would have been better as a two-parter. I liked the alternate Earth with all parts of time squashed into one. And we of course haven't seen the last of the Silence!
I did like the Doctor's escape! Made me smile.

Office-trains are cool.

And the question, the most obvious question of all; Doctor Who?
We know it will eventually be answered as River knows the Doctor's name.

Overall, I think I could have done without most of the second half of the series. It was definitely the weakest of the re-boot. However, Matt Smith made up for the poor story choices, and the series finale was excellent!

she doesn't know his name, that's not what he whispered into her ear (unless he told her some other time). not sure if the whole copy doctor small people thing was a bit of a cop out, why does time continue if he didn't actually die when he was supposed to? or even die and then regenerate? or wake up from a dream? or be told the princess is in another castle?

Everyone thought his death was the fixed point in time, because that is what it was recorded as. However the real fixed point was River appearing to kill the doctor. So they did not change the anything when he did this, he just fooled everyone into thinking he was dead.

Wow this is not convoluted at all is it! Also the first time we meet River she knows his name, she also dies the first time we and the doctor meet her (sort of).

 

[Seventh Actuality]

Well I think its good they're using new villains, but those two work because they do have a presence. The Weeping Angels have presence. The Silence had some presence initially, but now they're just kind of pushed and pulled to and from the spotlight at a very odd pace.

Now, instead of being kind of freaky, I just think, "weren't they done with these?". The stories just trail off.

I agree with you about the Angels, but I think they suffer from the same problems as a lot of Doctor Who villains; one very obvious and very simple motivation. The Silence are more complex and I like that.

At the end of the day, it comes down to personal taste.

Actually, the Angels have never been given a motivation. All that's implied is "they eat time energy". That isn't really a motivation, in my opinion. That's just how they survive. Humans kill and eat animals, Angels zap sentient life forms back in time and eat the potential energy of their lost years. Or they latch onto the nearest source of massive amounts of temporal energy (the TARDIS first, then the Crack on the Byzantium).

That's just how they live. sure it's horrible but it's never been about world desctruction or genocide.

And therein lies why I think Cyberman and Daleks are, in a word, retarded. Both of them are "make our kind the only thing left", through conversion of other beings or outright destruction, respectively. But... then what? Those two forces have the drive and the means but never the ends. What are they going to do with themselves once they're all that's left?

The Angels work because of how they're presented (or more accurately, how they were presented in "Blink"): amoral, unknowable, mysterious horrors working off instinct. They were really Lovecraftian, a different kind of villain altogether to the usual Doctor Who foes. Their second appearance kind of ruined this, but not totally, and they may yet get their shit back together.

And while you have a point about the Daleks and Cybermen...the Daleks make sense when viewed in context: a faction of human-like beings with an extreme ideology who have devolved but are still intent on survival and obsessed with their own superiority. They work best when they're not the omnipotent god-monsters the new series frequently makes them; survival and perpetuation of your species becomes a much more interesting motivation when you can't fly, shrug off almost any attack and blow up the fucking universe on a whim. You need to see them less as a "planet of the hats" bunch of aliens and more like a bunch of mad human mutants. That's what differentiates them from cybermen: they're not emotionless and they're not a hive mind, they're Nazis.

The Cybermen in their original form (i.e. from Mondas and not a parallel universe run by that bloke off Only Fools and Horses) weren't so much about the rampant xenophobia either: they were just another warring race whose schtick happened to be that they had given up their humanity for technology. Their new versions are way too much like the Daleks, complete with that painful "Delete!" as a poor man's "exterminate!" Bleh. It looks like this might be reversed, with the Mondas Cybermen back now.

 

[OriginalLadders]

Okay I should have said "a plan" instead of a motivation. But they still don't have any solid villain motivation in logical terms, because they're not doing anything but what they need to.

Essentially, the Doctor kills them or traps them in their quantum lock forms forever, just because they... try to survive.

Actually you can apply that "All aliens bad except the Doctor" thing to the Silence too. In Day of the Moon, he raised humanity as an army against the Silence... but why? What were they doing? They were guiding humanity, that's it. Some would call it manipulating, yes. Yes they made us want to go the moon in the first place but it's never explained why they wanted that. If you take that episode, by itself... their greatest crime is one random member of them killing one random American woman in a Whitehouse toilet.

Nobody even noticed them so any harm they were even potentially doing is kind of negated since until the Doctor comes blundering in nobody noticed or gave a shit. They might have had nefarious intentions for the moon landing, but it's still never expanded upon. For all we know they wanted Armstrong to get to the moon because they wanted humanity inspired to reach out into deep space and spread across the stars.

Seriously, I dare anyone to go back. Watch the Series 6 2-part premiere and tell me, using only information from the episodes themselves, what the Silence's big evil plan was. I dare anyone to enlighten me because I sure as Hell can't find anything concrete against them.

I have to say that the thing about the Angels is a non-issue; yes they were just trying to survive, but wouldn't you do everything you could to avoid being eaten by a shark?

Also, just because no one notices something bad happening, doesn't make it okay. The Silence were basically using humanity as puppets for their own goals, which in my opinion is nefarious.

 

[Riesel87]

What an awful end to a truely awful series of Dr Who. Only the james cordon episode was really good, spoiled by Amy Pond's cameo. This series has been full of continuity errors, more retcons than you can count and the truely tiresom plot of Amy pond and river song. River song has been the most over used and underwhelming character to hit dr who. Poorly devised retcons to turn her into a central character, which just wouldnt end.

What retcons?

well making her amy and roreys daughter for one.
Making river that black girl who died for another.
making river song part timelord.

these are all retcons.

Those aren't retcons... they're plot developments.

No those are retcons. Discovering something never previously known about someone after the fact is called a retcon. Changing something about someone i.e introducing the black girl at the end, into amy and roreys past is retro active continuity. She was added after the fact, a retcon. I dont know how to explain that any better

I don't think you can count them as ret cons for one simple reason:

Time can be rewritten. They weren't present at first because the version of events we saw until that point hadn't been altered by future events and time travel in include them. Melody being Amy's best friend for instance? That couldn't have happened until "A Good Man Goes to War", after which Melody Pond went back in time to ensure her parents got together and eventually gave birth to her.

We didn't see her or have her mentioned because from a non-linear non-subjective standpoint, she didn't exist yet.

Time travel, it's very confusing.

What i question is whether or not the writters intended for these plot points from day one, or they added them to make the new story work. In theory anything and everything that is a fact can be changed in dr who because of the paradox of time travel. But in the real world that paradox doesn't exist, so its a simple question of how much faith do you have in the writers foward planning? for me it is not a lot, lol.

 

[Seventh Actuality]

Actually you can apply that "All aliens bad except the Doctor" thing to the Silence too. In Day of the Moon, he raised humanity as an army against the Silence... but why? What were they doing? They were guiding humanity, that's it. Some would call it manipulating, yes. Yes they made us want to go the moon in the first place but it's never explained why they wanted that. If you take that episode, by itself... their greatest crime is one random member of them killing one random American woman in a Whitehouse toilet.

Nobody even noticed them so any harm they were even potentially doing is kind of negated since until the Doctor comes blundering in nobody noticed or gave a shit. They might have had nefarious intentions for the moon landing, but it's still never expanded upon. For all we know they wanted Armstrong to get to the moon because they wanted humanity inspired to reach out into deep space and spread across the stars.

Seriously, I dare anyone to go back. Watch the Series 6 2-part premiere and tell me, using only information from the episodes themselves, what the Silence's big evil plan was. I dare anyone to enlighten me because I sure as Hell can't find anything concrete against them.

[/quote]

What the Silence were doing in Day of the Moon was not a plan in itself, it was part of the larger plan to kill the Doctor. So they did have a big evil plan, but it wasn't apparent in that episode.

The Silence as an organisation is much more interesting than as a race, but I do wish they'd tell us something about them already. Madam Kovarian is (or was) very cool, but we need a little more about their motivations already. The "The Doctor is scary! He makes things worse!" speech we got in Demon's Run wasn't a lot to go on, and the idea of the Doctor being the one messing things up is tiresome bullshit - even more so now than when it first started during Christopher Ecclestone's tenure.

 

[ReservoirAngel]

The Angels work because of how they're presented (or more accurately, how they were presented in "Blink"): amoral, unknowable, mysterious horrors working off instinct. They were really Lovecraftian, a different kind of villain altogether to the usual Doctor Who foes.

Looking at it this way... yeah, they do work. No denying that. I'm just playing the moral stickler and claiming the Doctor is kind of a dick for destroying them twice just because they try to live.

Their second appearance kind of ruined this, but not totally, and they may yet get their shit back together.

And here we disagree. I don't see the criticism for the Angels in Series 5. They were just as awesome, if not as effective (because we knew what their deal is, hence they weren't a mystery just a very grave threat).

And while you have a point about the Daleks and Cybermen...the Daleks make sense when viewed in context: a faction of human-like beings with an extreme ideology who have devolved but are still intent on survival and obsessed with their own superiority. They work best when they're not the omnipotent god-monsters the new series frequently makes them; survival and perpetuation of your species becomes a much more interesting motivation when you can't fly, shrug off almost any attack and blow up the fucking universe on a whim. You need to see them less as a "planet of the hats" bunch of aliens and more like a bunch of mad human mutants. That's what differentiates them from cybermen: they're not emotionless and they're not a hive mind, they're Nazis.

But the Daleks are emotionless, that's the point. They made themselves emotionless for the same reason the Cybermen did: emotions hurt and get in the way. The Daleks took theirs away, leaving only hatred. In theory at least, we've seen other stuff from them. Namely fear on occasion. And arrogance.

And on a tangent: I'm actually probably one of few people I know who is okay with Daleks being the "god-monsters", as you call them. It makes sense for them. Consider it in their own timeline: they had only been fighting relatively small engagements until that point (aside from the occasional planet take-over, though the planets were primitive compared to them).

Then they end up in a full-scale war across all of time and space with the Time Lords, probably the only species who can effectively match them. So they upgraded. Better armour to withstand attacks and the colossal effect of unshielded travel in the time vortex (though that was a losing effort, evidence Dalek Caan), better weapons and... actually, they could fly before the revival in 2005. So I'm actually okay with their slightly over-powered forms as they are now. Plus in their appearances in the new series...survival is still their motivation.

Dalek: That one only did what it did because it wanted its freedom and to continue the Dalek race, however in vain the effort was.
Parting of the Ways: New Dalek empire, to continue their species.
Doomsday: Same deal.
Evolution of the Daleks: Dalek Sec only wanted them to evolve and advance, but Caan, Thay and Jast wanted to conquer the world by force to advance that way.
Stolen Earth/Journey's End: New Dalek empire. They managed it too, for a while.
Victory of the Daleks: Returning to purity and their end goal is just to... escape and live on.

It looks like this might be reversed, with the Mondas Cybermen back now.

I doubt it. The Mondas Cybermen look like the same deal as the Lumic brand.

 

[NeonWraith]

One thing I should point out, since apparently no one really pays attention to things like Private Eye anymore:

A big part of why this series has seemed so incoherent isn't really anything to do with Moffats writing, more to do with backroom politics.

Specifically, wrangling over the budget for Dr. Who, which is now in bad enough shape to force them to resort to stupid things like partnering up with US TV networks (I'm looking at you, Miracle Day) to get sufficient funding.

The other part of it is probably less of an issue but still relevant: Two people who were involved in the creation of Dr. Who (I don't have the right Private Eye to hand, but I *think* they were producers) were universally loathed by the rest of the cast & crew, and were eventually given the boot and not replaced, which would've caused some disruption.

So...yeah. Politics & funding issues are why there was an inexplicable break in the middle (also, there's no trailer for the X-mas special because the filming has been delayed by 3 months or so).

 

[ReservoirAngel]

What the Silence were doing in Day of the Moon was not a plan in itself, it was part of the larger plan to kill the Doctor. So they did have a big evil plan, but it wasn't apparent in that episode.

Exactly. So taking that episode by itself, the Doctor is out of line. He didn't know their plan, so he essentially killed them because... well, they were aliens lurking on Earth in secret.

The "The Doctor is scary! He makes things worse!" speech we got in Demon's Run wasn't a lot to go on, and the idea of the Doctor being the one messing things up is tiresome bullshit - even more so now than when it first started during Christopher Ecclestone's tenure.

It hasn't been going since Eccleston. The worst Eccleston ever got laid on him was "you are the Doctor, the Great Exterminator.

But that was only because of the Time War, which wasn't really a "he fucked up" thing, it was a "he prevented things from going tits up on an unimaginable scale".

Politics & funding issues are why there was an inexplicable break in the middle

I always thought they put the break in because they wanted to have River's big reveal as a cliffhanger but couldn't stretch until the end of the series for it.

 

[Riesel87]

The Angels work because of how they're presented (or more accurately, how they were presented in "Blink"): amoral, unknowable, mysterious horrors working off instinct. They were really Lovecraftian, a different kind of villain altogether to the usual Doctor Who foes.

Looking at it this way... yeah, they do work. No denying that. I'm just playing the moral stickler and claiming the Doctor is kind of a dick for destroying them twice just because they try to live.

Their second appearance kind of ruined this, but not totally, and they may yet get their shit back together.

And here we disagree. I don't see the criticism for the Angels in Series 5. They were just as awesome, if not as effective (because we knew what their deal is, hence they weren't a mystery just a very grave threat).

And while you have a point about the Daleks and Cybermen...the Daleks make sense when viewed in context: a faction of human-like beings with an extreme ideology who have devolved but are still intent on survival and obsessed with their own superiority. They work best when they're not the omnipotent god-monsters the new series frequently makes them; survival and perpetuation of your species becomes a much more interesting motivation when you can't fly, shrug off almost any attack and blow up the fucking universe on a whim. You need to see them less as a "planet of the hats" bunch of aliens and more like a bunch of mad human mutants. That's what differentiates them from cybermen: they're not emotionless and they're not a hive mind, they're Nazis.

But the Daleks are emotionless, that's the point. They made themselves emotionless for the same reason the Cybermen did: emotions hurt and get in the way. The Daleks took theirs away, leaving only hatred. In theory at least, we've seen other stuff from them. Namely fear on occasion. And arrogance.

And on a tangent: I'm actually probably one of few people I know who is okay with Daleks being the "god-monsters", as you call them. It makes sense for them. Consider it in their own timeline: they had only been fighting relatively small engagements until that point (aside from the occasional planet take-over, though the planets were primitive compared to them).

Then they end up in a full-scale war across all of time and space with the Time Lords, probably the only species who can effectively match them. So they upgraded. Better armour to withstand attacks and the colossal effect of unshielded travel in the time vortex (though that was a losing effort, evidence Dalek Caan), better weapons and... actually, they could fly before the revival in 2005. So I'm actually okay with their slightly over-powered forms as they are now. Plus in their appearances in the new series...survival is still their motivation.

Dalek: That one only did what it did because it wanted its freedom and to continue the Dalek race, however in vain the effort was.
Parting of the Ways: New Dalek empire, to continue their species.
Doomsday: Same deal.
Evolution of the Daleks: Dalek Sec only wanted them to evolve and advance, but Caan, Thay and Jast wanted to conquer the world by force to advance that way.
Stolen Earth/Journey's End: New Dalek empire. They managed it too, for a while.
Victory of the Daleks: Returning to purity and their end goal is just to... escape and live on.

It looks like this might be reversed, with the Mondas Cybermen back now.

I doubt it. The Mondas Cybermen look like the same deal as the Lumic brand.

Just wanted to ask. Is it me or does the Silence have a very warped moral stand point. They want to kill the Dr to prevent him ending the universe, yet they kill any and all that get in the way. For the greater good? does that make them good guys or what. Im not swure what to make of it, or have i got it tits about arse?

 

[Seventh Actuality]

snip

The Angels didn't work for me in series 5 because they were given too many powers and too many human attributes. The "anything that holds the image of an angel becomes an angel" power is just trying way too hard (and the effect for the angel coming out of the screen looked utterly ridiculous) and the "using a dead guy's voice" both made them less scary by giving them a human aspect and by once again trying too hard - and that's before you realise that it's Moffat using the exact same gimmick he did in Silence in the Library, and it wasn't that scary then.

On the Daleks...you're right, it makes sense for the daleks to be that powerful now in the context of the Time War, but it means that every Dalek episode has to be an all-or-nothing game wherein a deus ex machina is the only weapon powerful enough to beat them. They may have fit in the time war, but they're completely unsuited to being villains in regular episodes.

And while they could fly before, they hovered, they didn't zip around like frisbees. The whole design of them is supposed to indicate something slow and implacable - they were specifically meant to invoke tanks. Having them fly takes that away - once again, by making them more powerful in-universe, they become far less intimidating.

 

[JaymesFogarty]

So...what other plot holes have you spotted? Because I really can't think of any.

Let us count the ways (Roger Rabbit reference there for your entertainment).

"silence will fall" when "the Pandorica opens" ...... Sound familiar? 1

The Doctor uses the remaining atoms of the original universe inside the Pandorica to restore the universe to normal 2 ...... wait, what? As plots go ... come on, even for Doctor Who thats as far fetched as a bucket of shit from China.

Just how many times will the "silence fall".

How did Amy manage to get "kidnapped" and replaced without anyone knowing (never explained).

I need to get the big one of my chest ... Fixed point in time, no matter what the incarnation of the Doctor has been it's always been a staple that a fixed point in time can't be altered or bad things happen, on that do we agree?

Now then, how did ye olde Doctor survive? And no, just no that would not work. He did not die therefore a fixed point in time has been altered. The whole universe/time line/fate would not be fooled by "but it was not me, t'was the robot with shrunken me in it". It was a cheap ending and quite insulting to the viewers intelligence. Also, massive plot hole.

While the episode last week wasn't "too" bad it left a big plot hole ... Cybermen destroyed by "love". 3 Yes we've seen them destroyed with emotion before bu thats when their own emotion inhibitors have been destroyed NOT when a human has a show of emotion near them. So we are expected to believe that every time a cyber army has taken humans to be "assimilated" that none of them have shown upset and cried or love for a close friend/family member/child/goldfish. Again it was insulting to our intelligence and a massive insult to one of the Doctors more legendary foes.

Rory. Erased from time, brought back, became a robot centurion, became human but retained memories from being a robot centurion, became a soldier with no memory of ..... well ..... anything.

I think thats enough to be going on with for now.

Don't get me wrong though, I do really enjoy Doctor Who (why else would I watch it, i'm not a masochist who watches TV he hates) I just preferred it when it was family entertainment and didn't try too hard to do too much.

For instance, Sylvester McCoy is my favourite Doctor to date (mainly because I had a teenage crush on Ace ... she was nice).

Okay, I usually never reply to messages on The Escapist, but after reading your post I thought that it would be horrible for you to give up on a show because you missed anything. Here's basically how I see it;

1. That was never said. The whole 'Silence Will Fall' tagline was always a hint at Series 6.
2. The Pandorica contained millions of atoms from the proper timeline. Like how tiny chromosomes in the human body carry enough genetic information for flawless replications, it's said that these atoms hold a rough equivalent. The atoms are sent by the Doctor into the heart of the Tardis explosion. It's been stated that every point in history is simultaneously falling through the cracks, so by sending the atoms into the explosion, they would be present at every point in history simultaneously. It's perhaps a little far-fetched, but it's centuries beyond the 'that button there' resolution.
3. I completely agree. What a terrible way to end a decent episode.

 

[ReservoirAngel]

Just wanted to ask. Is it me or does the Silence have a very warped moral stand point. They want to kill the Dr to prevent him ending the universe, yet they kill any and all that get in the way. For the greater good? does that make them good guys or what. Im not swure what to make of it, or have i got it tits about arse?

It is warped, but you can see their logic in it. Besides, it's no less warped than the Alliance of Series 5's ending. Species who kill and main across the Universe suddenly teaming up to save it? Now THAT made no sense. Was an awesome moment though.

 

[Seventh Actuality]

It hasn't been going since Eccleston. The worst Eccleston ever got laid on him was "you are the Doctor, the Great Exterminator.

Actually, I was thinking of that one particular episode revolving around the Slitheen woman...there was a lot of navel-gazing about how the Doctor left "devastation in his wake". Umm, yeah, if by "devastation" you mean "stopping you from blowing the world up you crazy *****".

Just wanted to ask. Is it me or does the Silence have a very warped moral stand point. They want to kill the Dr to prevent him ending the universe, yet they kill any and all that get in the way. For the greater good? does that make them good guys or what. Im not swure what to make of it, or have i got it tits about arse?

I don't get how they want to prevent him from ending the universe - as I understood it, they were the ones responsible for the TARDIS blowing up in series 5.

Yeah, much as I loved this finale, some actual answers are long overdue here...

 

[Kurai Angelo]

What an awful end to a truely awful series of Dr Who. Only the james cordon episode was really good, spoiled by Amy Pond's cameo. This series has been full of continuity errors, more retcons than you can count and the truely tiresom plot of Amy pond and river song. River song has been the most over used and underwhelming character to hit dr who. Poorly devised retcons to turn her into a central character, which just wouldnt end.

What retcons?

well making her amy and roreys daughter for one.
Making river that black girl who died for another.
making river song part timelord.

these are all retcons.

Those aren't retcons... they're plot developments.

No those are retcons. Discovering something never previously known about someone after the fact is called a retcon. Changing something about someone i.e introducing the black girl at the end, into amy and roreys past is retro active continuity. She was added after the fact, a retcon. I dont know how to explain that any better

Uhh...

Definition for retcon:
Retroactive continuity (often shortened to retcon) refers to the deliberate alteration of previously established facts in a work of serial fiction.

When was it an established fact that she WASN'T their daughter?
When was it an established fact Mels (that black girl as you put it) DIDN'T exist in their lives?
When was it an established fact that River WASN'T half TimeLord?

I'm sorry but your argument is retarded. What you are describing are developments of characters that have been revealed as and when the story required them to be known. Where would the suspense have been if River's entire fucking back story had been outlined in her first epsiode? She would have been completely pointless as a story telling device. Obviously your brain has trouble with plot twists, perhaps you should stick to watching something else.

Right first off, calm down and stop swearing. I havent been offensive to you so don't be offensive to me. If you being insulting to put your put across is your only way, then it shows your level of intellect for what it is.

I have admitted to someone else that these may not be technically retcons, but they are as close as without changing any so called established facts.

To believe that moffat had designs to make all these plot points with River song in mind, when she lay dying in the library seems rather unlikely. I cannot imagine he was writing plot points to go for characters 2 seasons ahead that hadnt even been written. The fact is river song as a character has been in dr who 3 seasons. Therefore somethings, like the sudden addition of mel as a plot point, is just moffat adding things as and when to make things fit with his new story. That reflects in the quality of programme, as dr who is ment to be thought provoking, but when you can see things like that being done it doesnt make for good watching.

It has made river a confused character, with sudden aditions to fit the new story. These are hardly thought provoking twists, adding random bits of information to a character that has dragged and ultimately fulfilled every expected outcome.

Say what you like about swearing being a reflection of someone's intellect, I think your spelling and grammar is more indicitive of feeble intelligence. I don't see how the utterance of the word 'fuck' suddenly means I'm stupid...

At the end of the day, you have no idea whatsoever what Moffat was planning so you have no grounds to complain and preach about so called retcons. You may very well be right, half of the things you described could have been major tricks pulled out the arse, so to speak, but again you don't know. Furthermore, to refer to them as retcons is grossly inaccurate. Whatever you may think of the writing or presentation, no established facts have been changed or altered in regards to the issues you raised.

Next time, a bit of reflection on what you're actually pissed off about might be in order before you start whining about retcons. (A google definition search wouldn't hurt either.)

I may have got the technical term incorrect, but at least I put a view foward. All you are doing is complaining about grammatical errors and corect use of techincal terms. As if I am going to spend any time checking that my spelling and grammar is perfect while on an internet forum. I also went on to admit that to call them retcons was not technically correct, however you continue to make the same redundent point.

You haven't made one point about the actual show itself, just to point out what I have labelled incorrectly. If it bothers you that much, then become an English teacher but spare me your judgement.

Also there is no right or wrong when it comes to an opinion. I have every right to complain about what I perceive to be poor screen writing. Based on logic, it seems likely that Moffat did not plan any of these things as far as 3 years ago, and is reflected in the quality of the last series. If Moffat comes out with documented proof of his master plan, then by all means come back and through it in my face, other wise my theory is valid.

If you would like to give an opinon on the show, rather than pointing out technicallities and errors of a grammatical nature then I would be happy to read them. Otherwise please troll somebody else!

Yes... I'm trolling you, of course.

I only mentioned your grammatical short falls because you felt the need to comment on the fact I used a naughty word (shock horror!) That had no bearing on your argument.

By all means complain of shitty writing if you so wish, I really couldn't care less. If you actually bothered to read my post you would know I had a problem with you over committing to incorrect definitve terms.

I know you backtracked and clarified in another post but I still felt oblidged to respond to your personal replies to me.

As for the 'master plan' as you put, scroll up, I cannot vouch for said person but somone has specified that River mentions the Byzantium in her first appearance. So, say what you will, some forward planning was obviously considered. It may have been slightly rough around the edges, but I'm sure it would have been impossible to commit to a story that span several series that far in advance due to a number of variables. I just think it's rather unfair to presume Moffat pulled it out of thin air at the last minute. He is a professional writer and storyteller, he will have had a good idea of his characters story and development well in advance.

Again I'm sorry if you think pointing out gross intechniqualities with your opinions is a waste of time, I just think ranting on false pretences is a bit stupid.

 

[Plinglebob]

That episode was probably my favourite series finale since the reboot. Cool looking scenes and tech, nice cameos and reappearences from old guest stars (anyone else notice Chales Dickens?) & touching memorials to others (RIP Brigader, but I was worried they would try and shoehorn in a Sarah Jane reference as well). It also had a good plot, great, emotional acting all round, decent pacing and the traditional ass-pull ending. Also, great to see the Dorian back as he's always worth the time spent on him.

2) Ohhhhjesusmylife Amy Pond looks good in that suit. Seriously, the feminist in me doesn't like making comments like this, but dayum. Although I have to note that I find Amy a lot more attractive now that she's an actual likeable, consistent character rather than the sociopathic nymphomaniac womanchild she was in series 5.

Hell yes! Though a big fan of the Doctors new hairdo as well

To be honest, I think my favourite bit of the episode (aside from Amy, in a suit, in an office, on a steam train!) was the lasr 3 minutes and the hints of whats to come (though I apologse if I read too much into it)

"I got too big, too noisy. Time to step back into the shadows" hopefully means they will tone things down slightly next year as the way things have gone (starting in RTDs time), it seems that by now the whole world and is wife knows that he exists. A man working from the Shadows, if done well, should be great.

"Its all still waiting for you. The fields of Trenzilor, The Fall of the Eleventh and The Question". First of all, brilliant question (if slightly meta). The way people on the show have talked about it does make it feel like they're nudging the fans a bit. "You've always wante to know his name, keep watching and we may answer". The fall of the eleventh comment suggests its something they'll bring up again when Matt Smith leaves and the fact his naming seems to happen in a public place, I'm guessing River will return at least one more for it (or be the one to ask).

Finally, did Matt Smiths final walk and look at the camera creep anyone else out?

Edit: 1 more thing, just watching from the start again and not sure if Dicken's Christmas Special comment was meant to be a reference to the episode he was in or a hint of what this years will be about. Hope its the second as it does sound promising.

 

[ReservoirAngel]

snip

The Angels didn't work for me in series 5 because they were given too many powers and too many human attributes. The "anything that holds the image of an angel becomes an angel" power is just trying way too hard (and the effect for the angel coming out of the screen looked utterly ridiculous) and the "using a dead guy's voice" both made them less scary by giving them a human aspect and by once again trying too hard - and that's before you realise that it's Moffat using the exact same gimmick he did in Silence in the Library, and it wasn't that scary then.

Objection! Them speaking through Bob was creepy as Hell, and that trick did work for the Vashta Nerada.

But I will agree with the "image of angel" thing being too try-hard to make them "unstoppable evil thing" status. Plus the "don't look in their eyes" is equally, if not more, stupid.

On the Daleks...you're right, it makes sense for the daleks to be that powerful now in the context of the Time War, but it means that every Dalek episode has to be an all-or-nothing game wherein a deus ex machina is the only weapon powerful enough to beat them. They may have fit in the time war, but they're completely unsuited to being villains in regular episodes.

I see you point here. And I do get sick of Dalek episodes ending with a Deus Ex Machina of some sort. I mean come on, Bracewell stopping exploding by thinking about his ex-crush? The fuck? Why would the Daleks put a function in there that in any way allowed that. He's a machine so he must, by the laws of robotics, obey whatever functions he was given. So they had to have put that function there when building him.

Having them fly takes that away - once again, by making them more powerful in-universe, they become far less intimidating.

And just to dick you about slightly in a joking way: did I miss the memo where regular ground tanks are more intimidating than flying ones?

 

[Rawne1980]

Okay, I usually never reply to messages on The Escapist, but after reading your post I thought that it would be horrible for you to give up on a show because you missed anything. Here's basically how I see it;

1. That was never said. The whole 'Silence Will Fall' tagline was always a hint at Series 6.
2. The Pandorica contained millions of atoms from the proper timeline. Like how tiny chromosomes in the human body carry enough genetic information for flawless replications, it's said that these atoms hold a rough equivalent. The atoms are sent by the Doctor into the heart of the Tardis explosion. It's been stated that every point in history is simultaneously falling through the cracks, so by sending the atoms into the explosion, they would be present at every point in history simultaneously. It's perhaps a little far-fetched, but it's centuries beyond the 'that button there' resolution.
3. I completely agree. What a terrible way to end a decent episode.

I appreciate your reply, and the explanation of the Pandorica. I admit to missing bits when that was being run through I had a bit of work to do and should have paid more attention. That was entirely my fault so thankyou for filling me in on that.

And you were right about the first part, I got it wrong. The actual line was "The Pandorica will open. Silence will fall" said by Prisoner Zero in the first episode.

http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Prisoner_Zero

It's in the second to last paragraph.

I do read up on bits but I did miss quite a few important parts it seems so I really do appreciate being corrected or filled in on parts I got wrong or missed.

Again, thankyou for breaking a habit and posting that for me, it is appreciated.