Doctor Who Series 7.9: Hide (SPOILERS)

Recommended Videos

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,581
0
0
Berithil said:
Agreed about that ending.

It was a pretty good episode, up until the last literal minute. Seriously, were they trying to sabotage the episode? The whole "monsters in love" thing contributed nothing to the episode. It would've been just fine keeping the monster an enigma. But instead they have to go ruin the whole thing.

Ugh....
Yeah, I feel like we were supposed to care about what happened to the monster...but the fact is, there isn't any point where we were given a chance to care about it. In the Van Gogh episode, you really felt bad for the space chicken thing when it died because they stopped for a moment and gave you a reason to care. It's abandoned and blind, not a mindless and monstrous predator, and suddenly the fact that it dies has impact because you pity it just for being there.

But these monsters? The only things they were throughout the whole episode were menacing and predatory. Perhaps if they'd hinted at emotions or pain along the way it would have been better, but you can't just suddenly expect your audience to care about what happens to your monster when all the monster has been up to that point is a terrifying and dangerous nuisance. Knowing the monster has a happy ending when you never cared what happened to the monster to begin with doesn't feel satisfying, it feels annoying and misleading.
 

Dangit2019

New member
Aug 8, 2011
2,449
0
0
Thought it was a 7/10 episode up until the very end.

Seriously? Can't the scary monster just be the scary monster? Shit, even MLP wouldn't have pulled something like that in the name of villain redemption.
 

frobalt

New member
Jan 2, 2012
347
0
0
Why do people blame Moffat for every episode they don't like? The guy didn't write this episode.
 

TimeLord

For the Emperor!
Legacy
Aug 15, 2008
7,508
3
43
frobalt said:
Why do people blame Moffat for every episode they don't like? The guy didn't write this episode.
At the end of the day he is executive producer and has eventual control of the episodes.
 

frobalt

New member
Jan 2, 2012
347
0
0
TimeLord said:
frobalt said:
Why do people blame Moffat for every episode they don't like? The guy didn't write this episode.
At the end of the day he is executive producer and has eventual control of the episodes.

Sure he does, and I'm sure he does edit things out or recommend things to be put in, but I doubt he contributes as much as people think to each story.

The whole thing about it being a love story was hinted at throughout the episode, which it looks back on right before the reveal. But the main thing that hints at it is that the monster is lurking but never attacking.
 

romxxii

New member
Feb 18, 2010
343
0
0
canadamus_prime said:
I agree with TimeLord, once again a little too touchy feely, esp. the end with the monster girlfriend thing. Otherwise a good episode. It seems to me that the Doctor is back to in form again (except for the touchy feely stuff).
One thing that's been bugging me since the last episode though, isn't landing in 1983 and 1974 going back on his own timeline? ...sorta
Not really. The Doctor's been to July 21, 1969 at least 7 times: 6 as David Tennant (see Blink), once as Matt Smith (Impossible Astronaut/Day of the Moon), . In all cases, he he goes for roughly the same reasons (the Apollo 11 moon landing) and manages to avoid his other visits.
 

TitenSxull

New member
Feb 17, 2009
29
0
0
I really didn't like the episode. The Doctor claims he went to get info about Clara from the empath but she shares nothing of interest on the subject. Monster-of-the-week filler is fine by me but this one didn't have all that much going on.

As for being disappointed I still think the episode I was most disappointed by is Angels Take Manhattan (spoilers incoming), really the worst way to "kill off" two of the best companions the Doctor has ever had is to have them completely succeed at escaping danger and then BAM, they're dead. But they're NOT dead, they're just back in time, and the Doctor has a freaking time machine. He can land somewhere, anywhere, in the year that they were transported back to, and get them. Using the excuse that Amy and Rory's disappearance was a fixed point doesn't help, since fixed points are themselves just a convenient plot device. That episode is just so convoluted, I think I would have rather seen Amy and Rory eaten or killed by some random alien monster they just made up.

Even if the Doctor can't save Amy and Rory for whatever reason he'd still be able to see them by simply visiting any of the years in the past they were still alive, not that such an event would make for great television but at least it'd ease some of the guilt to go back in time and see Amy and Rory living it up in the past.
 

Canadamus Prime

Robot in Disguise
Jun 17, 2009
14,334
0
0
romxxii said:
canadamus_prime said:
I agree with TimeLord, once again a little too touchy feely, esp. the end with the monster girlfriend thing. Otherwise a good episode. It seems to me that the Doctor is back to in form again (except for the touchy feely stuff).
One thing that's been bugging me since the last episode though, isn't landing in 1983 and 1974 going back on his own timeline? ...sorta
Not really. The Doctor's been to July 21, 1969 at least 7 times: 6 as David Tennant (see Blink), once as Matt Smith (Impossible Astronaut/Day of the Moon), . In all cases, he he goes for roughly the same reasons (the Apollo 11 moon landing) and manages to avoid his other visits.
I'm pretty sure the 10th Doctor (Tennant) only visited 1969 once in Blink and it was because he and Martha were zapped there by one of the Weeping Angels. Whatever I get your point and suppose that's true.
TitenSxull said:
I really didn't like the episode. The Doctor claims he went to get info about Clara from the empath but she shares nothing of interest on the subject. Monster-of-the-week filler is fine by me but this one didn't have all that much going on.

As for being disappointed I still think the episode I was most disappointed by is Angels Take Manhattan (spoilers incoming), really the worst way to "kill off" two of the best companions the Doctor has ever had is to have them completely succeed at escaping danger and then BAM, they're dead. But they're NOT dead, they're just back in time, and the Doctor has a freaking time machine. He can land somewhere, anywhere, in the year that they were transported back to, and get them. Using the excuse that Amy and Rory's disappearance was a fixed point doesn't help, since fixed points are themselves just a convenient plot device. That episode is just so convoluted, I think I would have rather seen Amy and Rory eaten or killed by some random alien monster they just made up.

Even if the Doctor can't save Amy and Rory for whatever reason he'd still be able to see them by simply visiting any of the years in the past they were still alive, not that such an event would make for great television but at least it'd ease some of the guilt to go back in time and see Amy and Rory living it up in the past.
The excuse given for why the Doctor couldn't save Amy and Rory had nothing to do with fixed points, it had something to do with a build up of temporal energy caused by the Weeping Angels and the Paradox or whatever. What got me was, ok so he couldn't land at the coordinates they were zapped back to, why couldn't he just pop back to the year after they were zapped back to and pick them up then? That way Amy and Rory would've just had to hang out in Manhattan for a year and then it's back aboard the TARDIS for more fun and good times.
 
Apr 17, 2009
1,751
0
0
Can I just point out to all you complaining that this episode is another example of "love solves everything" that love did not, in fact, solve anything and was at least in some way part of the problem since it was the Crooked Man's (and Crooked Woman's I suppose) attempts to reunite that were terrifying everyone in the first place
 

romxxii

New member
Feb 18, 2010
343
0
0
canadamus_prime said:
romxxii said:
canadamus_prime said:
I agree with TimeLord, once again a little too touchy feely, esp. the end with the monster girlfriend thing. Otherwise a good episode. It seems to me that the Doctor is back to in form again (except for the touchy feely stuff).
One thing that's been bugging me since the last episode though, isn't landing in 1983 and 1974 going back on his own timeline? ...sorta
Not really. The Doctor's been to July 21, 1969 at least 7 times: 6 as David Tennant (see Blink), once as Matt Smith (Impossible Astronaut/Day of the Moon), . In all cases, he he goes for roughly the same reasons (the Apollo 11 moon landing) and manages to avoid his other visits.
I'm pretty sure the 10th Doctor (Tennant) only visited 1969 once in Blink and it was because he and Martha were zapped there by one of the Weeping Angels. Whatever I get your point and suppose that's true.
Watch Blink again, and go to the part where the Detective Inspector gets zapped to 1969. Martha outright states: "Oh, the moon landing's brilliant. We went four times... back when we had transport"

So my bad, it's 6, not 7: 4 in TARDIS with Martha, 1 zapped by Angels (with Martha), 1 in TARDIS with the Ponds.
 

Canadamus Prime

Robot in Disguise
Jun 17, 2009
14,334
0
0
romxxii said:
canadamus_prime said:
romxxii said:
canadamus_prime said:
I agree with TimeLord, once again a little too touchy feely, esp. the end with the monster girlfriend thing. Otherwise a good episode. It seems to me that the Doctor is back to in form again (except for the touchy feely stuff).
One thing that's been bugging me since the last episode though, isn't landing in 1983 and 1974 going back on his own timeline? ...sorta
Not really. The Doctor's been to July 21, 1969 at least 7 times: 6 as David Tennant (see Blink), once as Matt Smith (Impossible Astronaut/Day of the Moon), . In all cases, he he goes for roughly the same reasons (the Apollo 11 moon landing) and manages to avoid his other visits.
I'm pretty sure the 10th Doctor (Tennant) only visited 1969 once in Blink and it was because he and Martha were zapped there by one of the Weeping Angels. Whatever I get your point and suppose that's true.
Watch Blink again, and go to the part where the Detective Inspector gets zapped to 1969. Martha outright states: "Oh, the moon landing's brilliant. We went four times... back when we had transport"

So my bad, it's 6, not 7: 4 in TARDIS with Martha, 1 zapped by Angels (with Martha), 1 in TARDIS with the Ponds.
I stand corrected. Must not have been paying close enough attention.
 

thiosk

New member
Sep 18, 2008
5,410
0
0
Feel good ending or no, I think its the best episode of season 7.
I've been ambivilent at best about the entire series. Of course, I was elated when they the ponds finally shuffled off.
 

Scorched_Cascade

Innocence proves nothing
Sep 26, 2008
1,399
0
0
Slightly late but just watched this:

Hmm...

This episode felt like three different episodes.

The haunted house start was awesome and made me jump a few times then it transitioned into a new episode about parallel universes and people trapped across them which was pretty cool but seemed only loosely connected to the first bit and then it transitioned into the last four minutes or so of awful.

Personally I'd have made the haunted house episode an episode by itself, the trapped in a parallel world bit a different episode and scrapped the last four minutes of monster ruining.

This could have been the episode that salvaged part two of the season. It still would have been a bit clunky in regards to how it fit together.

Were I to rewrite it I'd have the woman trapped in the other dimension as scattered through time by her attempt at time travel and the monster drawn to the spot she kept appearing in (instead of the lovey crap). I'd also had have more actors investigating the house so I could've killed some off. I'd have scrapped the pocket dimension and partner monster ideas entirely. Doctor would then both resolve the women bouncing around time and the monster through some ingenious thinking while bragging about how clever he was.

As it is I have to conclude: Episode had promise, didn't live up to it and then any living up it did manage was complete destroyed by the ending.

Dubious about next week's episode from the footage.
 

Shemming

New member
Jun 12, 2010
783
0
0
Has anyone pointed out that clara flew the TARDIS...On the grounds of, it could have gone any time, but it seemed to need a pilot?
 

BM19

New member
Sep 24, 2012
48
0
0
The strangest thing about Moff's episodes for me is that they're unevenly well-done.

For example, showing the ending monster's lover-monster appear in the mansion actually makes sense, showing that there is more than one monster but not bashing you over the head with it. It's one of those "oh yeah, that explains it" moments.
But little things, like having the TARDIS repeatedly say it will run out of power in seconds, but then fly around for about a minute with no problem? That makes no sense.

Honestly, I didn't mind the monster love story thing. Sure, Moff's NuWho has been leaning on the whole "emotions solve everything" bit fairly hard, but here it was at least a subversion. Honestly, I never questioned what that monster was -- finding out that its just trying to get back to its lady-friend was a strangely humanizing moment with a non-human character. (Exactly why it thought it had to scare the Doctor to get what it wanted is beyond me, but maybe it just doesn't communicate like we do)

Another weird thing that I'm not sure they answered either is how the thing ended up there in the first place. The Doctor says some vague "time-space accident" thing, but what? At least the time traveler being there made sense -- she was the first human time traveler and the machine went wrong. Understandable. Sensible, as far as Who goes. But this thing? It's just... There. Is time/space traveling something these monster-things do naturally, or is its presence there tied to the time machine, or what? Nothing.

See, this is why I get cross with NuWho at times: it tries too hard to do too much without giving enough time for what's there to breathe. It's been happening for a while now, most notably to me in the Beast Below, and while I usually don't mind a show suffering from an overburden of creativity, a lot of the stuff they end up jamming in there is just not worth the effort. I honestly wish that for just an episode or two they'd narrow focus and tell a good story without resorting to last-minute twists or the problem being fixed with a wave of the sonic.
... Not likely, I know, but a man can dream.

Also, I didn't mind the Rings of Akhaten. The only thing that annoyed me was the Doctor "holding the door" by over-acting with the sonic screwdriver. I mean... Really? You looked ridiculous, Eleven.
 

DelphiSantano

New member
Feb 11, 2009
120
0
0
I didn't mind this episode much to be honest, it had some good moments even if the episode wasn't perfectly balanced.

BM19 said:
But little things, like having the TARDIS repeatedly say it will run out of power in seconds, but then fly around for about a minute with no problem? That makes no sense.
This I had no problem with. I'll admit that it wasn't very well explained, but as the TARDIS only allowed Clara in and flew to the alternate dimension after the portal opened, I assumed that the portal created a sort of link to the original dimension, allowing the TARDIS to jump in and out without being drained dry, provided the portal didn't close while it was there. This is also supported by the Doctor asking the psychic to reopen the portal so the TARDIS can go and get the monster.

BM19 said:
Another weird thing that I'm not sure they answered either is how the thing ended up there in the first place. The Doctor says some vague "time-space accident" thing, but what? At least the time traveler being there made sense -- she was the first human time traveler and the machine went wrong. Understandable. Sensible, as far as Who goes. But this thing? It's just... There. Is time/space traveling something these monster-things do naturally, or is its presence there tied to the time machine, or what? Nothing.
I assumed with this one that the monster had ended up trapped there at the same time as the time traveler. As it turned out that she was related to the psychic and the ghost hunter (who owned the house), it's potentially safe to assume that she inherited the house and could have performed her "time-jump" from there, and before landing in the alternate dimension, accidentally pulled the creature in from a different point in the house's timeline and took it with her. (A bit of a stretch I know, but I think it could fit.)
 

Quaxar

New member
Sep 21, 2009
3,949
0
0
Shemming said:
Has anyone pointed out that clara flew the TARDIS...On the grounds of, it could have gone any time, but it seemed to need a pilot?
I'd rather say Clara convinced the TARDIS to go in. Also, the TARDIS had to wait for the portal to be reopened... although I'm not sure how they powered it with their power source changing dimensions and all.