Bricks in Motion
We are a friendly filmmaking community devoted to the art of stop-motion animation using LEGO® and similar construction toys. Here, you can share your work, join our community of other brickfilmers, and participate in periodic animation contests!
A place to discuss, share, and create stop motion films.
Ad
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Forums - Bricks in Motion » General Film Discussion » The Doctor Who Discussion thread(SPOILER ALERT!)
I was hoping for an epic battle like the one in "Doomsday" but with more aliens...
Yeah.. 
Hopefully next time.
Come to think of it - HOW DID RIVER SONG GET TO XX AD!!?!?!?!?
Quite near the beginning of the episode, we see her buying a time travel thingy from a chubby blue alien guy. He says it' still attached to the wrist, Captain Jack Harkness reference?
Oh, Rory is back. WTF!?!?! What is your explanation Moffat?
"I was dying....and then I was a Roman"
Wow. That is the worst explanation I have ever heard in my life, and I sat through 'Avatar'.
Oh, you weren't watching this very carefully were you? When River Song went to Amy's home, she found a picture of Rory in a Roman soldier costume, in the pile of books (Pandoras box etc.). Therefore in the trap the alliance set for the doctor, they created a Roman Rory as well as the Roman legion and the pandoras box.
Why did they create a trap using Amy's imagination? How did they get into Amy's room? Why would you need to use Amy's imagination? Why couldn't you just make one up yourself? What is the purpose? What does it achieve apart from more pointless filler?
That's the one thing I hope will be explained next time, and I'm really struggling to see how this episode is going to be resolved. I mean, the TARDIS has blown up, Amy's dead, the Doctor's locked in a box, an Rory's not really Rory, he's just a robot who thinks he's Rory. In addition, all of the docter's enemies ever are now surrounding the box that the Docter is locked in. I'm struggling to find any possible solution...
I'm struggling to find any possible solution...
42.
Therefore in the trap the alliance set for the doctor, they created a Roman Rory as well as the Roman legion and the pandoras box.
So Rory shot Amy? OK, that makes sense now - although they could have edited it better since it was a little unclear. And if Rory was a fake, how did they know he had died? No-one saw it happen apart from Amy and the Doctor. Come to think of it - how did they even know anything about Rory other than his appearance? Although, they may explain this next episode (they'd better...)
And, this isn't a big deal, but are the Romans Autons? The gun that shot Amy looked exactly like an Auton gun. I'm not confused, I'm just curious.
Quite near the beginning of the episode, we see her buying a time travel thingy from a chubby blue alien guy.
Oh, they actually did something during that scene. OK, problem solved.
Yeah, due to the earlier time slot I was having my dinner whilst watching so if I missed anything, I apologise. I should really have watched it again, but I haven't. You may kindly call me an idiot and hypocrite.
I'm half expecting the finale to be like 'Lost'. I would so flip if it turns out this is all a fantasy situation inside someone's head or some kind of alternate dimension.
-MRB
Last edited by Max Butcher (June 22, 2010 (02:52am))
Rory is an Auton, the Romans are Autons.
That....wasn't nearly as bad as I expected. In fact, it was pretty good.
Definitely not the best finale. I mean, the biggest enemy was a dysfunctional Dalek that kept regenerating even though it wasn't anywhere near the mystic magic light regeneration thing. And why does it take the Daleks a few seconds to regenerate but Amy over a thousand years? I may have missed some subtle exposition though....
Oh, Rory's apparently dead again. Oh, he's back again. Time wasted: 2 minutes. I understand the explanation of him guarding the pandorica, but what is the point in making out he's dead when he shows up five seconds later? If your trying to build suspense, wait until halfway through rather than five seconds later.
What's all this crap about 'mostly dead'? She got shot by an Auton gun - she is dead. I know that if they tried to bring her back from the dead I would be complaining, but what is 'mostly dead'? You mean to say that half of the people in my local cemetery still have a little bit of life in them? Or do you mean you are only mostly dead if you are mostly shot? Or if you have a mostly heart attack? Or if you have mostly cancer? Or if you mostly die of mostly old age? Or if you fall off a mostly tall cliff and mostly break your neck? WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY 'MOSTLY DEAD'!?!
Best part of the episode? When River song shot that stupid hat. For a moment I thought we were going to have another poor attempt to get everyone to start wearing an uncool and stupid item of clothing. It was almost like they were parodying the bow tie.....and it was GLORIOUS!! Its like they know its stupid and are making fun of themselves for coming up with it. Though still not as awesome as "WOULD YOU CARE FOR SOME TEAAAAA?"
Oh, Amy cant remember her travels with the Doctor. BECAUSE THAT'S NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE IN THE HISTORY OF DOCTOR WHO!!! *cough*Donna*cough*
Yeah, I know Moffat decided to stick a happy ending to the end of the last series finale....but he's still ripping off RTD, which in my books is a crime punishable by DEATH!! And despite the Amy-cant-remember-oh-now-she-can-never-mind thing was essentially filler.....it made sense. It was relevant and fitted in with the storyline, for once.
And Moffat STILL didn't explain my previous holes of:
1. Why can all the monsters jump in time to XX AD when we last saw the Cybermen in the 19th century and the Daleks in the 20th century?
2. How did the monsters get into Amy's bedroom and why did they use her stuff for inspiration when they could have easily made up something less obvious by themselves?
3. How did the monsters know everything Rory had done including how he died (which was only witnessed by three people - one of whom died a second later and another who couldn't remember the event afterwards)?
4. Why do they think that locking the Doctor away in a big box and deliberately keeping him alive will stop him? Why dont all the monsters combined realise that by locking him away you are giving him ample time to either come up with a plan to escape or let someone else release him - which is exactly what happened.
5. How could Van Gough have done that painting of the pandorica opening? If the TARDIS is destroying periods in time, then Van Gough wouldn't have had enough time to draw it. And how did he even know it was the pandorica behind all this?
I suppose you could argue that these are like asking questions such as "is there a toilet on the TARDIS?" - but its these little things that stop you from really getting into the episode, and these things pile up and up until you cant take it seriously any more.
Finally......what was the point in the "26.6.10" thing? The event mentioned in the episode took place when Amy was a child.....YEARS BEFORE THE PRESENT DAY!! So it didn't even happen on the 26.6.10....SO WHAT WAS THE POINT?!?! WHAT DID IT ACOMPLISH? WHAT DID IT DO TO THE PLOT?
Willy Wonka:....NOTHING!!
I cant think of anything else that was wrong apart from what I'm about to mention. I could nitpick every line, but I wont since I liked this episode. It lacked the epic scale of the RTD finale's and the climax wasn't anything more intense than any other episode. But it seemed to have something most of the episodes lacked - EFFORT. This is one of the very few episodes that looks like someone other than Moffat has actually proof-read.
Two things that have constantly bugged me throughout the entire series:
1. Machinery being overridden by LOVE. This has happened three times, and the first time confused me enough. This isn't Harry Potter, this is SCIENCE FICTION, meaning it has to have some kind of grip on reality. Love overriding technology is something you get in a kids movie - not Doctor Freaking Who! Computers do not understand emotion, and do not recognise it. There is no way a machine can override itself, it just cannot happen. If a machine is programmed to perform a certain function, it cannot stop it by itself. Sure, if you sonic it then maybe - but not with LOVE!? Machines are not compatible with emotion!! Emotion is not like a USB device!!! EMOTIONS AND MACHINES ARE NOT COMPATIBLE!! IT MAKES NO SENSE!! IT JUST DOESN'T WORK!!!
The only time I am willing to accept this is if the computer involved has a real Brain, like the Cybermen. A real brain is able to generate emotion and so can disobey the computer. But a computer cannot disobey a computer unless you program it to do so - and this isn't including LOVE in the equation.
2. Apparently, the TARDIS which started off as a Time Machine that has some kind of mysterious force that allows it to travel in time can now make you GOD! By owning a TARDIS you can now protect yourself from paradoxes, save a persons life by locking them in a time loop and you have the power to END THE UNIVERSE!!
ITS A TIME MACHINE!! It is a device that travels in time!! It is not some binding power that connects the whole of time and space together! The TARDIS is like the Starship Enterprise. Its gets you from A to B and has some cool gadgets and functions along the way to help you. The Starship Enterprise as a ship did not control the fate of the universe! Did I miss an episode when the Doctor said that the TARDIS is linked to entire space time continuum and that should it explode then time itself will collapse and the universe would end. NO!! ITS A TIME MACHINE!! Its not GOD!! The TARDIS has now turned into nothing but a plot-hole preventer. "Why are we still alive?" "Because the TARDIS is protecting us". "Why is the universe ending when its just the TARDIS exploding?" "Because....its....the TARDIS!".
Sure, it explodes at different points in time. So? The TARDIS does not have the energy to destroy the universe. And its not even destroying the universe - its just destroying planet Earth in different time zones. The Universe cant end in different time zones, there can only be one end.
I know Doctor Who isn't exactly scientifically correct - but there is science-fantasy and then there is bullcrap. You can only make up so much in the name of SCIENCE before it becomes too stupid to ignore. LOVE? Seriously. I know Love is awesome, but it just doesn't work with computers.
In conclusion: FIRE MOFFAT. I really dont know what happened to him, but this is not the Moffat we all know and love. Either its because he has to write like 5 episodes and then has to oversee and re-write the rest, has been spending too long writing with Hollywood, or because of the earlier time slot - meaning he has to be more 'family friendly' (AKA: Stupid) But not a single one of the episodes he has written has been ANYTHING like his previous works. I dont know what went wrong here, but I think for the shows sake he should return to just one or two episodes per series.
Maybe I'm so annoyed because my expectations and the bar were so high with Moffat, but the bar has been lowered. However, despite this, I will still watch Doctor Who because I'm a hypocrite with nothing better to do on a Saturday Night. And with that:
Willy Wonka: Good day sir!!
-MRB
They effectively ended with a cliffhanger which didn't explain the cracks, or the "silence" arc. 6 months to go, guys.
Two things that are pretty late, but still stand:
1: If the TARDIS exploding ends the universe, then what happens if lots of TARDISes explode? *COUGH* Time war *COUGH*
2: If the Daleks, Cybermen, Sontarans and whoever else was at the party has some mystical light that ressurects you, then why not put it in their casing?!
Immortal Daleks = Doctor is screwed.
1) The Time War was in a "bubble" that cut it off from the rest of space and time, which would then contain any explosions and prevent the whole "exploding at every point in time" thing (the TARDIS is connected to the time vortex so any explosion would end up spreading through it via a cascade effect. This is evidently a problem for any TARDIS given how they function, so the "engines shut down when no-one's inside" thing is most likely a standard fail-safe for the situation).
2) It was a "restoration field" which was intended to keep the Doctor alive throughout his imprisonment. I suspect that none of them actually realised that this could also be used to stop themselves dying (just like they never realised that it held a memory of the entire universe - don't ask how that worked, it's one of the things that technobabble can't explain). Mind you, this is also evidence for my theory that the aliens present weren't the ones behind the whole thing.
Also it's a pretty crap restoration field if it takes a Dalek about 30 minutes to an hour to fully restore itself. That sort of thing ideally needs to work within 10 minutes in order to be even remotely useful, because it's vulnerable during that time otherwise.
But if the field was inside the casing, it would ressurect the creature pretty quickly...
Quite possibly, but I think one of the reasons the Pandorica is so big is because of the amount of power needed for such a field. So perhaps another reason why they didn't use in their casings and suits is because of the very high odds that if they're killed the power supply for the field will be destroyed also.
That, and the Daleks already believe they're the ultimate life-form - using the field would dent their over-sized egos. 
I still find it odd how the 'restoration field' can restore a Dalek in about 30 mins, yet it takes Amy centuries to come back from the dead. Oh sorry, I forgot....she's MOSTLY dead.....
And....the Doctor can raise the (mostly) dead? Is this really what you want your kids to know? "Don't worry Mum, Grandma's only mostly dead. We can bring her back in a jiffy!"
I'm still puzzling about how the Tardis suddenly has the power to end the universe when the Doctor seemed more worried that Donna was trapped inside it when the Daleks tried to destroy it back in Series 4. And the Tardis is not destroying the universe - its just destroying Earth in different time zones. Moffat thinks the universe revolves around earth? How arrogant is that!
It was a "restoration field" which was intended to keep the Doctor alive throughout his imprisonment
I still think its the most stupid of evil plans since "I shall destroy the entire universe....including myself!!" to deliberately keep your enemy alive in a big box giving him plenty of time to escape.
Plus I still cant get over the fact that a) Moffat stole the ending to Series 4 and just added a happy ending onto it - resulting in 10 mins wasted that should have been spent giving a better explanation as to how everything righted itself instead of some hasty technobabble. b) The finale was hyped up with the 26.6.10 storyline, which was meant to be the date that the world ended. But the actual episode took place when Amy was a child.....YEARS BEFORE THE PRESENT DAY!! and c) LOVE CAN OVERRIDE MACHINERY???? Why is no-one questioning this impossible and downright stupid feat apart from me?
And after hyping the 'Crack' storyline arc at the end of EVERY. SINGLE. EPISODE.......ITS STILL NOT EXPLAINED?? Despite this being the biggest and most important thing in the Doctor Who universe.....we still have to wait until next series!?
And the 'Crack' arc was really subtle, wasn't it? I know in Series 1 it was too subtle so they had to point it out just before it came into play - but the 'Torchwood' arc was possibly the most subtle as long as you didn't read the Doctor Who magazine (every issue was like "OMG WHAT IS DIS TORCHWOOD?? CULD MAYBE IT HAV SOMETHING TO DO WITH DE FINALEEEE?!?!) And Series 3 was fairly subtle - stuff with the poster in Episode 1 went by mostly unnoticed. Series 4 might have been subtle if it wasn't announced that Billie Piper was returning by the OFFICIAL WEBSITE!! Talk about Spoilers....
To be honest I'm fed up of these Storyline Arcs. I find it really funny how Moffat is doing all he can to rid Doctor Who of anything to do with RTD, right down to devoting an entire episode merely to changing the design of the Daleks, yet he's doing almost exactly what RTD was doing. He's not being more darker, more edgy, more deeper, more intelligent....he's not even scary any more. The only time I was genuinely frightened was when that Angel was coming out of the TV - that was the only moment where Moffat actually tried to scare us. I should have been scared by Amy wandering around blind, but I was too concerned about WHY THE ANGELS ARE MOVING!?! to feel scared.
My only conclusion is that Hollywood sucked the wit and originality out of Moffat. I cant believe people are saying that Moffat is the "custodian of the greatest story ever told". No. This is not the greatest story ever told. It has potential I admit....and its sort of entertaining....but just because its entertaining doesn't mean its 'good'! (Though, this critic thought 'Love and Monsters' was complex, so all credibility has been removed)
-MRB
AND ANOTHER THING:
I just remembered that Dalek screaming for mercy....
Moffat, my dear man, did you by any chance forget that DALEKS DON'T SHOW ANY EMOTION OTHER THAN HATE!!! It was only explained... like...20 times in the RTD era!! This is basic rules of Doctor Who!! Its like if the Doctor met himself......OH WAIT!
What's all this crap about 'mostly dead'? She got shot by an Auton gun - she is dead. I know that if they tried to bring her back from the dead I would be complaining, but what is 'mostly dead'? You mean to say that half of the people in my local cemetery still have a little bit of life in them? Or do you mean you are only mostly dead if you are mostly shot? Or if you have a mostly heart attack? Or if you have mostly cancer? Or if you mostly die of mostly old age? Or if you fall off a mostly tall cliff and mostly break your neck? WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY 'MOSTLY DEAD'!?!
I missed this one when you first wrote it, but...
Mostly dead.
Haha! Yeah, I think Moffat must have been watching 'Princess Bride' when writing last episode...
-MRB
Max, all your points are answered if you pay attention to the smegging episode.
Amy - it's stated quite clearly when she's put in that they have to wait until something with her biological imprint comes along befor eit can restore her (child!Amy). She's also "mostly dead" in that by the time she was put in the Pandorica she hasn't been dead long enough to be impossible to bring back.
The TARDIS exploding - it's happening at every point in the universe, but Earth was at the centre of the explosion and therefore at the "eye of the storm" so it takes ages for the effects to take place (similar to how the downforce of a helicopter's rotor blades is almost no-existent near the centre compared to around the edge). The Earth is able to survive because the TARDIS had stuck itself in a time loop to save River, which left it as a mini!Sun constantly exploding/imploding/whatever. The original explosion happened on the date of the finale - why do you think the Doctor told River to get out of Amy's house when he realised when she was? So yeah, the episode can take place while Amy's a child because they haven't reached that date yet.
And finally - and brace yourselves, because this is my berserk button well and truly pressed - STORY ARCS ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE SUBTLE. YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO KNOW WHAT THE BASIC STORY IS, THAT'S WHY IT'S CALLED A "STORY" ARC AND NOT A "WORDS AND THINGS FROM EVERY EPISODE THAT APPEAR IN THE FINALE" ARC.
*breaths*
But seriously, saying that S5 has a bad story arc because it's unsubtle is ridiculous, especially since virtually all of Classic Who is structured in a similar manner.
And seeing as subtle means "so slight as to be difficult to detect or describe," S3's story arc doesn't exactly qualify as "subtle" either because it's made obvious by the end of episode 6 (incidentally roughly the same point where the crack makes its first reappearance in S5) that something was going to happen on Election Day and it involved Mr Saxon and would involve Martha's family. In fact, that may be why S3 is the odd one out in my eyes - it's the only New Who series with an honest-to-God story arc in it, even if it takes longer to get going than S5's (S4 seemed to be unsure which direction the story arc is meant to be facing - you don't actually get a proper handle on it until episode 11).
PS: I strongly suggest everyone reads up on temporal paradoxes, because the show does make far more sense once you're familiar with the basics (it cuts down on headaches too).
I'm a little late to this topic, but I'll have a post anyway.
I think I'm going to agree with Blue on most points here.
Firstly Mr Butcher, don't knock the fez. Fezzes are cool.
Secondly, Amy and Donna's circumstances regarding their forgetting of their adventures with the doctor were rather different.
Thirdly, there probably is a toilet in the tardis, along with the multitude of sleeping quarters, library, swimming pool, secondary and tertiary control rooms etc...
Fourthly, regarding the Love vs Machines situation. I must admit, I myself was a little skeptical of this as the new cures-all solution for the series, but it does have its merits, and it does make sense in some places. In the dalek episode, the professor can overide his oblivion continuum bomb because although he doesn't have a human brain per se, he does have a sufficiently realistic interpretation of one to be a very convincing humanoid android. It's entirely possible that with far more advanced technology and the necessary programming, an AI of sufficient complexity would be capable of simulating emotion. As it was so nicely put in the Matrix, 'Love is a word, what is important is the feeling that word represents,' (hasty paraphrase there) and if the machine was complex enough to react to stimuli in a way analogous to the way a human reacts with an emotion, it wouldn't be an enormous jump to suggest the machine was 'feeling' an emotion.
Personally I think S5 has been quite a good series, perhaps my favourite so far.
Also, a story arc doesn't have to be almost undetectable in its subtelty to be effective. Even though this has been one of the more obvious to spot story arcs of Doctor Who, it has been a very effective one. It can stil result in speculation and discussion and the thrill of finding out what is actually going on. Come on, you must be excited to find out what caused the TARDIS to explode, and who the hell River Song really is? I mean, even to the very end there was lots of room for speculation. Hell, up to the end I was in a discussion about a farfetched yet oddly plausible Ragnarok situation involving lots of obscure norse mythology and it being River stuck in the pandorica. It was, IMO, a good story arc, although perhaps it did end up asking more questions than it answered.
Overall ratings for the series from me (out of 5):
1 [4.5]
2 [3.0]
3 [2.5]
4 [4.5]
5 [4.5]
6 [4.0]
7 [5.0]
8 [3.5]
9 [3.5]
10 [4.0]
11 [3.5]
12 [4.5]
13 [4.5]
Average is around 4, so on the whole a very good series. Matt Smith is probably up there with Tom Baker as one of my favourite Doctors. I also quite like the Hartnell/Brachacki TARDIS paint scheme and the new interior is fantastic. The new 'Skittles- Exterminate the Rainbow' Daleks I'm not too sure about. I preferred the British Army daleks to be honest. It's true theyre a little more retro (the rainbow of daleks from the non-canon Cushing movies for example) and have gone back to identifiable jobs (supreme, drone, etc...) but I do prefer the Time War bronze daleks, even if they were a little too short for Pond (partly promting their redesign).
Max, Moffat's awesome. Don't diss Moffat.
Grr...
Do...... All..... You..... Guys..... Talk...... About...... The new doctor who series?
I've been watching old episodes on youtube, not as good as today's but I like them.
Max, Moffat's awesome. Don't diss Moffat.
Again, I suppose my expectations were too high. I wasn't expecting every episode to be like 'Blink', but I was expecting a darker, wittier, and edgier feel - which I didn't get. I still think that despite Moffat doing all he can to be different from RTD, he's not taking the show in any new directions, nor is he trying to create a different formula to RTD.
She's also "mostly dead" in that by the time she was put in the Pandorica she hasn't been dead long enough to be impossible to bring back.
So if your dead for a few hours you can be bought back to life, yet if your dead for about a week or so your stuffed? I'm sorry, but when your dead....your dead. There is no scale of deadness where a person who has been dead for a few years is very dead and a person who is dead for a few hours is mostly dead. What point is a person 'all dead'? When a person is dead they are dead. It doesn't matter if they are a pile of dust or a fresh corpse, they are dead. They are no more. They have ceased to be. They have kicked the bucket and joined the choir. If they we....OK I'll stop it....
I suppose it makes some sense because the process of decay hasn't really kicked off properly yet - but surely it would still be able to stop that? We are not given an idea of how much the pandorica can heal, we only know it takes 30mins to restore full power back to the Dalek and can bring a mostly dead person back to life. Doctor Who is a Sci-fi. You dont have bringing people back from the dead in a Sci-Fi. I know Sci-Fi doesn't mean "everything described and shown is possible in real life" but it means it doesn't delve into things like resurrecting the dead. It is an unwritten law that Science Fiction should stay far away from superstition.
Secondly, Amy and Donna's circumstances regarding their forgetting of their adventures with the doctor were rather different.
Yes, I've heard that whilst Donna had to forget to keep herself alive, Amy has to remember to keep the Doctor alive or something like that. I know Moffat wasn't deliberately copying Donna, but you cant deny that forgetting about her adventures and stuff - casing a big tragedy is incredibly similar. I also see it as pointless how she cant remember, we all feel sad, and then she remembers and everyone's all happy. What does this accomplish? What do we learn? Nothing. Unnecessary Drama at its finest....
The TARDIS exploding - it's happening at every point in the universe, but Earth was at the centre of the explosion and therefore at the "eye of the storm" so it takes ages for the effects to take place
Ah, I get it now. Although it still annoys me how increasingly powerful the TARDIS is getting. Its starting to turn from the simple Time Machine that it was in Series 1 into a tool for writers. I get that the earth survives due to the time loop, but surely the TARDIS is not that powerful that it can freeze the earth in a constant loop.
I hate how there is a simple solution to everything in this series. I know the Doctor is like James Bond and Indiana Jones in that he can get himself out of anything just because he's the hero and therefore has the almighty power of the script on his side - but the TARDIS has become the lead fridge of the Doctor Who. The fact that the Doctor can destroy an army of stone angels by pressing a button, stop killer vampires by plugging something in, and get himself out of a dream/reality dilemma by saying that they are both dreams (meaning they were in no danger AT ALL) followed by him flicking a switch removes all suspense. Before, watching Doctor Who was like watching a James Bond trap - how will he get out of it? But now, the Doctor seems to be getting out of it easily - with no real effort. The last episode was the only time he actually broke a sweat, but I honestly didn't care that he was a 'broken man' or 'vunerable' because I know he will get out of it.
And the cliffhanger on Episode 12 wasn't suspenseful or exiting at all thanks to the knowledge that we've seen River Song die before (I know its meant to be interesting how we go back into her past, but it just means we know what's going to happen) and that the plan to lock the Doctor in a big box will obviously not work since its the stupidest evil scheme since The Joker planned to launch an explosive Octopus into the UN.
Fourthly, regarding the Love vs Machines situation. I must admit, I myself was a little skeptical of this as the new cures-all solution for the series, but it does have its merits, and it does make sense in some places. In the dalek episode, the professor can overide his oblivion continuum bomb because although he doesn't have a human brain per se, he does have a sufficiently realistic interpretation of one to be a very convincing humanoid android. It's entirely possible that with far more advanced technology and the necessary programming, an AI of sufficient complexity would be capable of simulating emotion. As it was so nicely put in the Matrix, 'Love is a word, what is important is the feeling that word represents,' (hasty paraphrase there) and if the machine was complex enough to react to stimuli in a way analogous to the way a human reacts with an emotion, it wouldn't be an enormous jump to suggest the machine was 'feeling' an emotion.
Hm....I get your explanation. I still think that using Love as a solution is very........Harry Potter-ish, but your argument is reasonable.
But seriously, saying that S5 has a bad story arc because it's unsubtle is ridiculous, especially since virtually all of Classic Who is structured in a similar manner.
I haven't watched much of the Classic Who, so I'm afraid I cant compare much.
And seeing as subtle means "so slight as to be difficult to detect or describe," S3's story arc doesn't exactly qualify as "subtle" either because it's made obvious by the end of episode 6 (incidentally roughly the same point where the crack makes its first reappearance in S5) that something was going to happen on Election Day and it involved Mr Saxon and would involve Martha's family.
Ok, by halfway through Series 3 you are aware of a certain Mr Saxon.....but did you honestly expect him to be 'The Master'? I didn't (although I was much younger then, and not as nit-picky).
And I get that your supposed to be aware of a Story-Arc.....but the crack thing was INSULTINGLY OBVIOUS. Sure, I didn't understand it until Episode 3, but do you really need to keep pointing it out at the end of EVERY EPISODE.
Max, all your points are answered if you pay attention to the smegging episode.
Smegging? I am so stealing that...
-MRB
BTW:
PS: I strongly suggest everyone reads up on temporal paradoxes, because the show does make far more sense once you're familiar with the basics (it cuts down on headaches too).
I've read a bit about it in the past (there is a great book that actually debates if the stuff in Doctor Who is scientifically possible) but I may want to check it out. However, I dont think there will be any explanations about restoration fields...
Posts [ 321 to 340 of 1,011 ]
