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

[ReservoirAngel]

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 *****".

Okay, that is in there. But that's only very slightly done. The 9th Doctor didn't really get much of that baggage. It was mostly the 10th (especially towards the end) and the 11th that have gotten that "you cause so much destruction".

I think the first time it's really trotted out is "Journey's End" when Davros pulls that awesome "how many more? Just think. How many have died in your name?" and "you take ordinary people and you turn them into weapons" crap on Tennant.

 

[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!

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.

Fair enough, point well received.

I don't think he had no foward plan with regards to the story, as im sure he knew from day one her overall role. Its just the journey getting there I have a problem with. Humans making timelords in the tardis, and half episode cameo characters to explain new developments. It is not the high standard of writing that as Dr Who fans we have come to love and expect. He most probably knew where he wanted the character to be, just the journey there from my stand point, was not a coherent and well planned one.

Also I have no issue with you swearing, I couldn't give a shit. But I didn't want to turn this into a retarded slanging match, so I thought I would try and defuse it by pretending to take offense.

 

[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.

Fair enough, point well received.

I don't think he had no foward plan with regards to the story, as im sure he knew from day one her overall role. Its just the journey getting there I have a problem with. Humans making timelords in the tardis, and half episode cameo characters to explain new developments. It is not the high standard of writing that as Dr Who fans we have come to love and expect. He most probably knew where he wanted the character to be, just the journey there from my stand point, was not a coherent and well planned one.

Also I have no issue with you swearing, I couldn't give a shit. But I didn't want to turn this into a retarded slanging match, so I thought I would try and defuse it by pretending to take offense.

Fair enough dude. I can see how some poeple will take issue with things, but I just take everything with a pinch of salt. I'm not expecting it to be absolutely perfect, afterall, it is primarily a childrens show so don't expect it to be the pinnacle of story telling.

The only other point I will make in regards to the human/timelord/tardis issue, is that it was his his idea and he coiuld pretty much tell it as he liked. No one had ever conceived a child in the TARDIS before so we can't accurately speculate how the time vortex would affect a child's development. Afterall, we know it has an effect in people that just travel through time, so it would be safe to assume it had a larger effect on conception.

 

[Superbeast]

Something that we all seem to be forgetting; that question that must never be answered HAS ALREADY BEEN ASKED. The Doctor asked the question when he stepped out of the Tardis, poisoned and dying in 'Let's Kill Hitler.'

It was also asked by Jakie Tyler in 'Christmas Invasion'. Dorium asked it himself a the end of the episode. I'm guessing Silence will fall when the question is asked, and answered.

I was confused by this as well, given that the "Dr Who?" joke has been made with annoying regularity across the various series of the show.

However, whilst chatting about it with my partner, we realised that the question has to be asked "on the Fields of Trenzilor, at The Fall of the Eleventh", given the context that Trenzilor is a location where any being present has to answer truthfully.

There's also some (old) background about how only the Timelord's parents, and they themselves, know their true name, and how all Timelords take another name to use (such as The Doctor, The Master etc.), however I have forgotten why they have this practice - I get the feeling that it is going to be extremely important to the next series, given that the series seems to be revolving around "the question".

 

[GiantRaven]

1) The Silence (if that's what they're actually called) make much cooler monsters when the whole episode doesn't revolve around them and their powers.

I disagree. The Silence are probably the most interesting monsters introduced into Doctor Who.

A whole episode could be written where they wouldn't appear at all, yet the would characters still understand what is happening around them. This is illustrated perfectly in the episode, where the Doctor asks Winston Churchill about his gun, where all the Silence related action happens inbetween the cuts shown in the episode. This creates a fourth-wall breaking connect between viewer and character, much like 'Blink' which another fantastically structured episode of Doctor Who.

So yeah, woo for the Silence.

 

[soes757]

I thought it was alright, a little disappointed that I figured out the twist before I started the episode (the Tesalector (How the hell do you spell it) one) but the alternate earth was cool.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Brigadier Lethbridge Stewart.

Were that you will still around.

/salute.

 

[Plinglebob]

Just as a note for those interested, Doctor Who Confidential has a nice segment plotting the timeline of River Song. While I've never been a fan of confidential, this waswell worth watching.

 

[OrionHardy]

I don't think he had no foward plan with regards to the story, as im sure he knew from day one her overall role. Its just the journey getting there I have a problem with. Humans making timelords in the tardis, and half episode cameo characters to explain new developments. It is not the high standard of writing that as Dr Who fans we have come to love and expect. He most probably knew where he wanted the character to be, just the journey there from my stand point, was not a coherent and well planned one.

To be fair to Moffat, don't forget he created River Song during Russell T Davis' run and at a time where it wasn't known that Davis and Tennant was leaving after the 2009 specials and that he would taking over. He couldn't have planned much for her character because for all he knew at the time RTD and Tennant could have stayed on for another series/season or even a few more series/seasons and Moffat asked to bring her in for another one of episode or even have RTD take her and use her in another way. Of course it didn't, but Moffat didn't know that.

 

[Vault Citizen]

This episode felt more like a midway point to another episode than an actual finale. I was expecting the mystery of who exploded the Tardis, how they did it and why to come up but unless I missed something it hasn't yet.

I'm a bit annoyed that this episode left us with yet more questions, and I really hope that this is all actually leading somewhere.

 

[The Electro Gypsy]

I quite like the episode, River Song's actress actually put some FUCKING effort into it for a change and turned out a half decent char. The Doctor's escape did make me chuckle tho, that was well done.


Also, woo Karren in a suit

 

[The Electro Gypsy]

EDIT: Oops, double post...

 

[Loop Stricken]

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

mustnotlaughmustnotlaughhavebeendrinkingmustnotpost

Maybe he just tells her his name when they're more.. intimate.. He does allude that River's nights are her own even if she's locked up. it's not like that prison is ever capable of holding her.

 

[joemegson94]

And the question, the most obvious question of all; Doctor Who?

I'm betting on it being 'Keith'.


Anyway, pretty good episode, but i knew the Doctor would survive.
He always does.

"Keith" is what I speculated it would be when I watched it.

Anyway, this was a great episode, especially the opening. Unfortunately, there were a couple of plot holes, inconsistencies and unresolved story threads, but I still really enjoyed the episode.

Lastly, when did Amy become such a *****? Come on.

 

[pilf]

Maybe I'm just going soft, but I nearly cried at the Brigadier scene.
Excellent episode, ddn't tie up as many ends as I thought it woul but it worked really well.

I thought it was a good ep very strong throught out and that cliffhanger.but kinda wanted a trailer for the chrismas special at the end

I would have liked to have seen something for Christmas too, but the episode is still in very early production stages.

 

[joemegson94]

Apologies for the double-post, but in the last few minutes, I thought of an arse-load of unresolved stuff and things which don't make any sense from this series.

How did Kovarian take River back to Lake Silencio from 2153?
For that matter, how was Amy kidnapped, when there's no evidence of humans having access to time-travel at that point?
If Kovarian could time-travel, why not just kidnap Melody after she was born, and save 9 months of sitting around waiting for Amy to give birth?
Is Kovarian a midwife, or what? Pick a bloody job.
Why was Kovarian's eye drive electrocuted by The Silents?
How did the Teselecta start to regenerate in Day of the Moon?
How come the Silents survived a laod of gunshots unharmed, then were killed easily by Amy?
Why did The Silence want the Doctor to die?
What did they do with Amy when she was captured in DOTM, if she was already pregnant?
What is the point of building a functional car, then attaching a balloon to it?
If the Silents are scavengers, and they needed human technology, how did they make a semi-sentient spacesuit?
What was that Silent doing in Utah in 2011?
Why would a 17-year old be awake at 3 in the morning ranting about Doctor Who on an internet forum?

It makes no sense.

 

[Shadow flame master]

I'm waiting to see if we'll get to the part of when and how River takes the doctor's sonic screwdriver and helps out the 10th doctor in the episode about the library.

But I have found interest in what Amy said about her mother-in-law. Apparently we'll get to see the Doctor's parents in the next season which leaves me to belive we'll also get to see a return of the Master. Thinking about it, maybe the Master kills the Doctor and answers the question, or maybe a love intrest from the Doctor's past gets pissed about him being married and is more intelligent then the Doctor, more sadistic then the Master, and more cunning than River Song combined.

But seeing that the whole mother-in-law thing is asking these questions(at least for me)the bigest I'm concerned with is that if the Doctor's parents are alive, then what about Gallifrey and the people who are still alive on it? Will he have to kill his race again? Will he be killed by his race?

Only time will tell, and the Doctor's time is running out.

 

[Atticus89]

Apologies for the double-post, but in the last few minutes, I thought of an arse-load of unresolved stuff and things which don't make any sense from this series.

How did Kovarian take River back to Lake Silencio from 2153?
For that matter, how was Amy kidnapped, when there's no evidence of humans having access to time-travel at that point?
If Kovarian could time-travel, why not just kidnap Melody after she was born, and save 9 months of sitting around waiting for Amy to give birth?
Is Kovarian a midwife, or what? Pick a bloody job.
Why was Kovarian's eye drive electrocuted by The Silents?
How did the Teselecta start to regenerate in Day of the Moon?
How come the Silents survived a laod of gunshots unharmed, then were killed easily by Amy?
Why did The Silence want the Doctor to die?
What did they do with Amy when she was captured in DOTM, if she was already pregnant?
What is the point of building a functional car, then attaching a balloon to it?
If the Silents are scavengers, and they needed human technology, how did they make a semi-sentient spacesuit?
What was that Silent doing in Utah in 2011?
Why would a 17-year old be awake at 3 in the morning ranting about Doctor Who on an internet forum?

It makes no sense.

1) Time travel.
2) Some stupid Time Agent may have traveled back in time, got killed, and had their vortex thing stolen.
3) Because Kovarian is an evil and awful woman. That's pretty obvious.
4) She's a Jack (or Jill in her case) of all trades.
5) She outlived her usefulness. Also, Amy needed to get revenge.
6) It's a massively complicated machine that can form into any person ever and even create clothing and inanimate objects. Recreating regeneration energy can't be too hard for something that can make a motorcycle come out of its crotch.
7) Nameless soldiers have horrid aim and you can't trust military troops in science fiction since 98% of them are inept.
8) If you had the ability to control people and they never knew it, would you want some centuries old madman with a police box ruining such a cushy gig? I sure wouldn't.
9) Probably fan fiction related things not suitable for children. Or kept her in a pod and watched her in isolation, which could be fan fiction material too for some sick perverts.
10) Because it's cool.
11) There have been other aliens who have come to Earth so they probably stole stuff from them. Also, just because they're scavengers doesn't mean they're stupid. They got to Earth somehow, so they know how to use all types of technology.
12) Ensuring that the Doctor died. The biggest insult to a man who saved the universe countless times would be to die in the middle of nowhere in Utah, though that's just redundant when you think about it. (to all people in Utah, I'm sorry you live in Utah and I hope you can take a joke. I'm in Texas so you already know how fucked up my state is.)
13) Because you were probably expecting someone to be asshole enough to answer them all so you could retort every single answer they give to avoid going to sleep. You're welcome, by the way.

It makes plenty of sense when you don't think about it.

 

[Pedro The Hutt]

And so the Mary Sue points continue to pile up to scandalous high amounts for both River and Amy, by now even eclipsing Rose as the worst Sue of the show.

On top of that we get the stupidest cop-out ending that renders the entire episode, if not the entire season, pointless.

The Daleks along with the Cybermen are just reduced to playthings or MacGuffins for the Doctor and Moffat's own creations keep on getting stronger and stronger, at this rate I really am going to wish that RTD would return to the show, he could be annoying but never this head deskingly frustrating at this.

Also, lore infractions up the wazoo.

Too much rage to write a coherent post. *fistshake*

 

[DarqueMage]

Apologies for the double-post, but in the last few minutes, I thought of an arse-load of unresolved stuff and things which don't make any sense from this series.

How did Kovarian take River back to Lake Silencio from 2153?
For that matter, how was Amy kidnapped, when there's no evidence of humans having access to time-travel at that point?
What is the point of building a functional car, then attaching a balloon to it?
What was that Silent doing in Utah in 2011?

It makes no sense.

I'll answer the ones I have snarky or funny responses to.

-See next answer.
-Kovarian got a vortex manipulator from Hedonism Smurf, just like River did in last season's finale.
-Because when you see a pterodactyl, your first thought it always going to be, "I need to hit that with my car!!" ........oh wait, that's just me.
-He was really lost and REALLY late to pose for Edvard Munch.