It's very possible that we learn who she is, but not who she kills. I think they'll milk that a bit longer, along with the Doctor's death.
Mr Awe
"A Good Man Goes To War" Prequel & Trailer
- Thread starter StCoop
- Start date
It's very possible that we learn who she is, but not who she kills. I think they'll milk that a bit longer, along with the Doctor's death.
Mr Awe
Steven Moffat: "Who fans abroad - the prequel is region-locked cos you haven't seen ep 6 yet!"I see the BBC's reverted back to geolocking the promo videos
We haven't? . . . Oh yeah . . .,
, we haven't.Mr Awe
Last edited:
The images that have been released for the episode are really intriguing. Amy looks older - how much time has passed? And what's with the babes with the swords?
(And yeah I recognize one of them - all hail Moffat for finding an excuse to get
.)
I'm spoiler-tagging that because while most sites carrying the publicity pictures have shown the one with the brunette, I've only come across one site (so far!) that has ... the other picture. Plus I think I recognized her voice in the trailer.
Alex
(And yeah I recognize one of them - all hail Moffat for finding an excuse to get
Neve McIntosh back into the lizard-soldier fetish gear
I'm spoiler-tagging that because while most sites carrying the publicity pictures have shown the one with the brunette, I've only come across one site (so far!) that has ... the other picture. Plus I think I recognized her voice in the trailer.
Alex
I don't think she looks old, I think she's supposed to look like she's just spent months inside a "hospital" ward-tube or something. But my personal theory is that she spent ten years locked up after the events of the last episode, and should be ten years older now. If they save the kid in the next episode, that's likely, if they save only Amy, they'll probably save the kid by the end of the season, and she's been only a few months there and only a few days or weeks after she gave birth.
That's what the trailer and photos seem to indicate - the kid won't be saved this time.
The real question about the episode that's on my mind at the moment is if the Jenny being played by Catrin Stewart is THE Jenny, who couldn't be played by the very pregnant at the time Georgia Moffatt?
Her return would be a lot to pack into an already stuffed episode but of all the featured guest stars she's the one who doesn't make any sense at the moment. Whoever she is though, she's damn cool.
Her return would be a lot to pack into an already stuffed episode but of all the featured guest stars she's the one who doesn't make any sense at the moment. Whoever she is though, she's damn cool.
^ I was wondering about that myself. Who is Jenny? I agree she looks tough and cool. Love that promo pic.
I'm in love with that photo.
Actually. If that's Jenny, the Doctor's daughter from Series Four -- and we should bear in mind that it was Steven Moffat who had RTD bring her back at the end of that episode...
... that might go a long way towards explaining why a little girl was regenerating in "Day of the Moon."
... that might go a long way towards explaining why a little girl was regenerating in "Day of the Moon."
Moffat's entire run to date has been utter garbage.
I miss RTD.
Please, could you go a little bit further with that brilliant thesis?
Series 5 and Series 6 with the exception of The Eleventh Hour, The Lodger and the Doctor's Wife have been boring, uninspired, clunky and tonedeaf to the demands of story, structure or logic.
We can debate this all you want, but this feels like Brannon Braga's Star Trek: Enterprise all over again. No matter what's served there's always those that'll eat it. It's like some insane tribalism that prevents people from being critical about things they love and knowing that the quality has dropped.
As have the viewing figures.
I'm sorry, but I really don't see how a series with such heartfelt, character-oriented moments as Amy hugging the Doctor at the end of "The Beast Below," or the evolving relationship between Amy, the Doctor, and Rory, or the entirety of "Vincent and the Doctor," could possibly be compared to ENT, which was full of cardboard cut-outs with no emotional lives.
That, or they disagree with you that the quality has dropped.
A little bit, yeah. Six seasons in, that was inevitable. I'm unconcerned.
I'm sorry, but I really don't see how a series with such heartfelt, character-oriented moments as Amy hugging the Doctor at the end of "The Beast Below," or the evolving relationship between Amy, the Doctor, and Rory, or the entirety of "Vincent and the Doctor," could possibly be compared to ENT, which was full of cardboard cut-outs with no emotional lives.
That, or they disagree with you that the quality has dropped.
A little bit, yeah. Six seasons in, that was inevitable. I'm unconcerned.
And again it feels like you're rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
For five years the show managed to entertain people who agree with you, and people who agree with me. It no longer entertains me the way it did.
I think the current series of Doctor Who is populated with cardboard cutouts that I cannot relate to. I think episode after episode is produced that is a continued waste of BBC funding and potential. And I think Steven Moffat is to blame, not because he can't write good television but because he has no idea what Doctor Who is supposed to be.
The Tardis exploded yet the Doctor never wonders about it. Uninteresting story threads like Amy's pregnancy, the regenerating child, River's identity are dragged on forever. If RTD had a misfire it was over *that* series. Instead it feels like I'm being given a forced walking tour of my own living room. I've SEEN science fiction but the show keeps presenting hackneyed warmed over storylines like its discovered America.
"As if I would ask her to kill." - The Doctor, as written by RTD
"I would kill us all on sight!" - The Doctor, as written by Moff
The show had a core philosophy that has been violated and it ruins it for a lot of us. I just hope Moffat takes his BAFTA and leaves Doctor Who for someone who can make me enjoy it again. The past season and a half has just been such a waste of my time.
I'm sorry to hear that.
Well, this is subjective, but I don't see these characters as cardboard cutouts at all. They seem vivid, three-dimensional characters with emotional lives to me.
What is Doctor Who supposed to be?
Of course he wonders about it. It's clearly been troubling him for a while. But it's also apparently not something he's found any leads on yet.
Moffat's choice to extend his arcs further than one season at a time is certainly new to the show. It either works for you or it doesn't; I don't know that there's any sort of objective standard for how long an arc is supposed to be.
I'm sorry, but I really don't see how a series with such heartfelt, character-oriented moments as Amy hugging the Doctor at the end of "The Beast Below," or the evolving relationship between Amy, the Doctor, and Rory, or the entirety of "Vincent and the Doctor," could possibly be compared to ENT, which was full of cardboard cut-outs with no emotional lives.
That, or they disagree with you that the quality has dropped.
A little bit, yeah. Six seasons in, that was inevitable. I'm unconcerned.
I would agree that the RTD era probably appealed to a larger audience because his episodes didn't involve long arcs spanning an entire series.
You sound like a television critic in Chicago who said at the beginning of this season "Doctor Who used to be a show that didn't take its self too seriously" I'm really off the walls sick and tired of that dumb it down so I can understand it mentality. I'll be blunt, I'm happy Steven Moffat is trying to make a show that appeals to people who like paying attention and not being spoon fed every detail.
I don't what "core philosphy you think Doctor Who is supposed to have but I have a hunch, it only exists in your head like people who think the 1950's was the golden age of America. Also, if you think it's such a waste of time then don't watch because a lot of us are enjoying it right now.
A fun show? One where characters behave true to their characterizations? One where characters like us ground the story with a sense of reality? One that is imaginative and doesn't give us a Cyberman/Dalek/Sontaran/Auton/Silurian alliance to shove the Doctor inside a box instead of SHOOTING him dead? One where the audience is never ahead of the Doctor like we usually are? One where people die and there are real consequences and a sense of danger?
I cared more for The Hostess from Midnight and Lynda with a "Y" then I have for any spear carrier in the Moffat era. And it has a lot to do with writing three dimensional characters and Moffat doesn't do that for Doctor Who. You can miss the tone of Who very easily and instead do a Hitchhiker's pastiche/farce. Moffat granted hasn't done that -- he's instead given us a series of twists (that I have seen coming) to make up for the lack of connection the audience has with the characters. In ten years people will remember Donna Noble and Rose Tyler. They won't remember Amy. And by people I mean the general audience at large, because Doctor Who isn't a niche show the way most scifi shows are. And Moffat is working real hard to make DW a niche show.
The Doctor has never wondered about it. The audience has never been shown the Doctor wondering about it, ergo he does not wonder about it. Television is a visual medium so if the audience is not told or shown then it does not happen. It's just a thread that's been dropped only to be picked up later on for plot reasons. The Doctor, as a character would be trying to find out why the Tardis exploded, who sent him the blue envelopes, not hanging out with pirates. Unless the plot requires that it be revealed later on in some silly "twist", which it will. I hope I'm wrong but I think River was built to be a weapon and she blew up the TARDIS unconsciously in The Pandorica Opens. I hope I'm wrong.
Brevity is the soul of wit, so an arc is supposed to be as long as it takes to hit all of its notes. The arc is being dragged out. Everything done in this season and last could have been done in one season. What's worse is that this *storyline* will not be over this season either! Cracks-Amy-Rory-River-Kovarian-Astronaut is being dragged out until 2012.
^ What is the matter with overlapping story arcs/plot points? Just because it's not resolved in a single episode, or two or three, doesn't mean that it won't be eventually. These twists and "uninteresting storylines" as you put it are meant to keep us watching. It's unfortunate that you don't like them or think very much of them.
Every season of RTD's run had a series long arc. So that's not a factual statement.
The story falls apart under the weight of its own logical inconsistencies. Why didn't the Cybermen, Daleks and Sontarans just kill the Doctor? Why did they put him inside the Pandorica? If the Pandorica could survive the destruction of the universe, why couldn't they just create a huge Pandorica-space ship to survive the death of the universe? Remember The Stolen Earth? The entire Dalek plan was to . . . destroy all universes? Remember that? Who's being spoon fed what pray tell?
You're the one not asking any questions.
The core philosophy that you don't commit genocide.
And a lot of us aren't. About three million viewers aren't as compared to the RTD era. Good for you, that you're enjoying it. I'm not. And back a few seasons ago we BOTH were enjoying it. But you're exhibiting that bizarre tribal fealty that defenders pull out for Attack of the Clones or Enterprise.
I'm enduring this poorly written dragged out arc counting the episodes until Moffat leaves and someone better (Gaiman, cough cough) becomes the showrunner.
I'm guessing he hated "Lost" with a passion because it dared to ask the audience to go along for a ride and be patient. I've written it before but I like long story arcs which questions that have no quick answers. And sure, is it possible some of the answers may be disappointing, absolutely but that's a risk I'm willing to take.
Because honestly, I would rather a TV show took a chance by treating me (the view) like I have a brain instead of the other way around.
Your focusing on the wrong thing there. Entirely on the wrong thing. It's not the arc, it's the substance (or lack thereof) of the arc. It's not interesting because it is vague and not well defined. There are too many unknowns for it to be truly interesting or a hook. And a character like The Doctor would be doggedly trying to answer these questions.
But he doesn't, otherwise the arc might resolve itself way too early. So the arc is artificially dragged out because The Doctor is behaving uncharacteristically disinterested in why his TARDIS exploded.
I don't think much of Lost because the show had no plan but to be vague and create mysteries for the sake of being vague and creating mysteries. There was no deeper story going on there, it was just one red herring after another and that's a terrible recipe for storytelling.
