A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor")

[Sindatur]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

The Doctor should know that it's his last life shouldn't he? And you're no one knew at the time, that's the real explaination.

Of course the Doctor knew, I'm not understanding the point you're making? Might not be forefront in his mind though, since he kept The War Doctor buried.

His inability to regenerate not in the forefront of his mind? I can't wait for your reaction the Christmas special.

You misunderstand, I'm saying his first impulse might have been that he might be able to Regenerate from the poison (for like a half second. You know, like in the beginning when someone important to you dies, or you break up with someone, and something big or funny happens, your first impulse is "I gotta tell so and so about this"... until you remember you can't a second later)

 

[DWF]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

Of course the Doctor knew, I'm not understanding the point you're making? Might not be forefront in his mind though, since he kept The War Doctor buried.

His inability to regenerate not in the forefront of his mind? I can't wait for your reaction the Christmas special.

You misunderstand, I'm saying his first impulse might have been that he might be able to Regenerate from the poison (for like a half second. You know, like in the beginning when someone important to you dies, or you break up with someone, and something big or funny happens, your first impulse is "I gotta tell so and so about this"... until you remember you can't a second later)

That'd work if he didn't know he was going to die at Lake Silencio, but he know ahead of time and that's he replaced himself with the Teselecta.

 

[Spocktapus]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

I think this has been suggested before, but most of these problems go away if the Doctor himself didn't think that the metacrisis regeneration counted until recently (perhaps after having been to Trenzalore?) After all, he would have known about the War Doctor, but evidently no one else did, so "fall of the eleventh" still makes sense. When the teselecta appears to regenerate, it does so because the Doctor assumed he would. When River poisons him, neither the Doctor nor the Silence know that he has used up his regenerations, hence the poison being thought necessary. Of course, he still has some regeneration energy left as of "Angels Take Manhattan", but perhaps not enough to fully regenerate?

 

[Mr Awe]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

The prevailing theory is that the Doctor thinks he can't regenerate in Time of the Doctor, but is surprised when does.

I agree with DWF that Smith being the 13th is a fairly recent idea. The other stuff just contradicts it.

Mr Awe

 

[Timelord79 (he/him)]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

Of course, he still has some regeneration energy left as of "Angels Take Manhattan", but perhaps not enough to fully regenerate?

or perhaps using that tiny bit of regeneration energy is the tipping point after the half regeneration/meta crisis, hence River being so angry at him.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

For what it's worth, I agree that Steven Moffat didn't think this was the last regeneration when he created the scenes for Lake Silencio. My guess is he figured it out either after he decided to create John Hurt's character or he figured it out when he figured out what Trenzalore was. In either case, that happened around the same time.

It doesn't mean it's impossible to explain away the previous examples that might be inconsistent in a way that shows it's not inconsistent at all (in fact, no one should take Doctor Who so seriously as to refuse to accept that it's not consistent), but that doesn't mean Moffat had a master plan related to regenerations since the beginning (he didn't even know when Matt Smith was leaving since the beginning, after all).

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

Of course, he still has some regeneration energy left as of "Angels Take Manhattan", but perhaps not enough to fully regenerate?

or perhaps using that tiny bit of regeneration energy is the tipping point after the half regeneration/meta crisis,

Honestly thinking about it I can't see how the meta crisis wouldn't count as he didn't just shove the regeneration energy back into his body he put it in his hand jar away from him and it made another doctor later so its pretty much been used up.

 

[ROBE]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

I presumed the regeneration energy he user on River was like the 10 years of his life he gave to the TARDIS in The Rise of the Cybermen?

 

[DWF]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

Ithink this should put an end to the speculation over Eccleston's possible role in the anniversary special and the creation of the war Doctor.

In the latest DWM, Moffat confirms that Eccleston would have filled what became John Hurt’s role: “Yes, but I was pretty certain Chris wouldn’t do it, although he did agree to a couple of meetings. So instead we had the challenge and excitement of introducing a BBC audience to a brand new Doctor.”

Asked if it would have been Eccleston ending the Time War instead: “Yes, but do you know, I was always nervous of that one, because it doesn’t fit with [2005's] Rose at all.

“[Eccleston] is a brand new Doctor in Rose, he’s absolutely, definitely new. It couldn’t have been is who pushed the button in the Time War, cos that’s a new man, very explicitly, in that episode. I also had trouble, I have to be honest, imagining it being Paul McGann’s Doctor.

“So all of this led me to the idea that if you’re going to sell to the Not-We audience a Doctor who essentially they haven’t seen before, then you have a freer hand than saying it has to be one of the ones you’ve already had. And it was predicated in getting an enormous star to be able to do it. We got John Hurt, so that was cool! Think of the fuss it’s created for us!”

 

[Sindatur]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

Hmmm...Strange. I agree, it definitely doesn't seem like it would've worked with Eccelston. Although I would have loved to see Eccelston in it, I'm glad he wasn't in The War Doctor Role, because it wouldn't have fit, based upon what we saw onscreen for the Special

 

[DWF]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

The special was of course written after Eccleston turned down the chance to be in it.

 

[Captain_Amasov]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

As I said it's obvious the idea of Smith's Doctor being the last one is a fairly recent one, as a poster on Gallifrey Base pointed out.

Why is there a need to nullify his ability to regenerate when hes poisoned in Lets Kill Hitler?

Why does River Song tell him off for using some of his regneration energy to mend her hand in Angels take manhattan?

Why does he START to regenerate after the first shot he takes from the 'impossible astronaut'?

For whatever reasons Moffat moved the goalposts again probably because it's the anniversary year and he just wanted to set up the next 50 years.

Was it ever actually stated that the poison that River used on the Doctor inhibited his ability to regenerate? When the Doctor asks the TARDIS interface he is merely told that his regeneration is disabled without further clarification; that could easily be because he doesn't have enough energy left to do so.

Also the Doctor may not be aware of how many lives he has left, but River Song probably does having studied the Doctor's various lives, she just can't tell him. So in that scene she lambastes the Doctor for using what remains of his regeneration energy to heal her wrist.

The final one is easily explained as it is the Teselecta that is simulating the regeneration effect.

 

[DWF]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

As I said it's obvious the idea of Smith's Doctor being the last one is a fairly recent one, as a poster on Gallifrey Base pointed out.

Why is there a need to nullify his ability to regenerate when hes poisoned in Lets Kill Hitler?

Why does River Song tell him off for using some of his regneration energy to mend her hand in Angels take manhattan?

Why does he START to regenerate after the first shot he takes from the 'impossible astronaut'?

For whatever reasons Moffat moved the goalposts again probably because it's the anniversary year and he just wanted to set up the next 50 years.

Was it ever actually stated that the poison that River used on the Doctor inhibited his ability to regenerate? When the Doctor asks the TARDIS interface he is merely told that his regeneration is disabled without further clarification; that could easily be because he doesn't have enough energy left to do so.

Also the Doctor may not be aware of how many lives he has left, but River Song probably does having studied the Doctor's various lives, she just can't tell him. So in that scene she lambastes the Doctor for using what remains of his regeneration energy to heal her wrist.

The final one is easily explained as it is the Teselecta that is simulating the regeneration effect.

River told him when she poisoned him that he couldn't regenerate. And the Doctor was in the Teselectra and he should know that couldn't regenerate.

 

[Captain_Amasov]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

As I said it's obvious the idea of Smith's Doctor being the last one is a fairly recent one, as a poster on Gallifrey Base pointed out.

For whatever reasons Moffat moved the goalposts again probably because it's the anniversary year and he just wanted to set up the next 50 years.

Was it ever actually stated that the poison that River used on the Doctor inhibited his ability to regenerate? When the Doctor asks the TARDIS interface he is merely told that his regeneration is disabled without further clarification; that could easily be because he doesn't have enough energy left to do so.

Also the Doctor may not be aware of how many lives he has left, but River Song probably does having studied the Doctor's various lives, she just can't tell him. So in that scene she lambastes the Doctor for using what remains of his regeneration energy to heal her wrist.

The final one is easily explained as it is the Teselecta that is simulating the regeneration effect.

River told him when she poisoned him that he couldn't regenerate. And the Doctor was in the Teselectra and he should know that couldn't regenerate.

Except she didn't; why else would the Doctor, after being poisoned and entering the TARDIS, say: "So, basically better regenerate, that's what you're saying", after he was told by the TARDIS interface that the poison had no known cure, only to be then told: "Regeneration disabled. You will be dead in thirty two minutes", by the interface. There's an assumption that one caused the other to not work, but the statements aren't necessarily directly linked other than by the current circumstances that had arisen.

It was a light show put on by the Teselecta to sell the idea that the Doctor was about to die to everyone else who didn't know, what else would everyone outside the Teselecta expect to see if a Time Lord was mortally wounded?

 

[Emperor-Tiberius]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

The special was of course written after Eccleston turned down the chance to be in it.

I read he'd written the outlines for both the possibility of Eccleston returned and the one not.

Anyway, I don't quite believe Moffat there. Eccleston as the War Doctor? Unlikely. Unless it was the Ninth early on, and like, a day or two after his regeneration.

But really, if any previous Doctor were to do this, it'd be Paul McGann. Can't see why it'd have been so difficult for him to realize this - the War Doctor himself was pretty Doctor-ish in behaviour, too.

Then again... it WAS stunt casting, so it makes sense.

 

[Christopher]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

I read he'd written the outlines for both the possibility of Eccleston returned and the one not.

Anyway, I don't quite believe Moffat there. Eccleston as the War Doctor? Unlikely. Unless it was the Ninth early on, and like, a day or two after his regeneration.

Why do you assume Eccleston would've replaced the War Doctor? Maybe he had an outline for a version of the story in which the War Doctor interacted with all three of his subsequent selves.

But really, if any previous Doctor were to do this, it'd be Paul McGann. Can't see why it'd have been so difficult for him to realize this - the War Doctor himself was pretty Doctor-ish in behaviour, too.

That would've had more appeal to the old-school fanbase, but a lot of the new-series audience isn't familiar with the old series, so it wouldn't have had the same impact for them.

Besides, I don't think revealing a hitherto-unknown Doctor is a bad thing. I think it was a hell of a clever twist, and I actually got quite a thrill seeing those end credits with John Hurt's name and face listed in the roster right between McGann and Eccleston. New discoveries are fun. Stories that take us somewhere unexpected are more rewarding than those that just reaffirm what we already assumed.

And while I thought McGann did a terrific job in "The Night of the Doctor," I don't think he would've worked as well in the role of the war-weary, broken-down, aged version of the Doctor as Hurt did. Having the War Doctor be elderly gave him a presence and texture that a younger man wouldn't have had, and a sharper contrast with the later Doctors. It brought something to the character that we haven't really seen since Hartnell. That's no mere stunt casting -- it's the right casting for what the role needed. Really, I wouldn't trade Hurt's performance for anything. I'd gladly see McGann's Doctor return somewhere, somehow, but he didn't belong here.

 

[DWF]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

Was it ever actually stated that the poison that River used on the Doctor inhibited his ability to regenerate? When the Doctor asks the TARDIS interface he is merely told that his regeneration is disabled without further clarification; that could easily be because he doesn't have enough energy left to do so.

Also the Doctor may not be aware of how many lives he has left, but River Song probably does having studied the Doctor's various lives, she just can't tell him. So in that scene she lambastes the Doctor for using what remains of his regeneration energy to heal her wrist.

The final one is easily explained as it is the Teselecta that is simulating the regeneration effect.

River told him when she poisoned him that he couldn't regenerate. And the Doctor was in the Teselectra and he should know that couldn't regenerate.

Except she didn't; why else would the Doctor, after being poisoned and entering the TARDIS, say: "So, basically better regenerate, that's what you're saying", after he was told by the TARDIS interface that the poison had no known cure, only to be then told: "Regeneration disabled. You will be dead in thirty two minutes", by the interface. There's an assumption that one caused the other to not work, but the statements aren't necessarily directly linked other than by the current circumstances that had arisen.

It was a light show put on by the Teselecta to sell the idea that the Doctor was about to die to everyone else who didn't know, what else would everyone outside the Teselecta expect to see if a Time Lord was mortally wounded?

I do think River does say it and in any event that's not the question. Why would the poison be needed to negate his ability ot regenerate? We've seen a Time Lord at the end of his regenerations try to regenerate and die in the process in The Twin Dilemma. There's no evidence that it was meant from the beginning that Matt Smith's Doctor is the 13th not the 11th.

 

[DWF]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

I read he'd written the outlines for both the possibility of Eccleston returned and the one not.

Anyway, I don't quite believe Moffat there. Eccleston as the War Doctor? Unlikely. Unless it was the Ninth early on, and like, a day or two after his regeneration.

Why do you assume Eccleston would've replaced the War Doctor? Maybe he had an outline for a version of the story in which the War Doctor interacted with all three of his subsequent selves.

It's highly unlikely that Eccleston would've turned down the special if that had been the case.

But really, if any previous Doctor were to do this, it'd be Paul McGann. Can't see why it'd have been so difficult for him to realize this - the War Doctor himself was pretty Doctor-ish in behaviour, too.

That would've had more appeal to the old-school fanbase, but a lot of the new-series audience isn't familiar with the old series, so it wouldn't have had the same impact for them.

Besides, I don't think revealing a hitherto-unknown Doctor is a bad thing. I think it was a hell of a clever twist, and I actually got quite a thrill seeing those end credits with John Hurt's name and face listed in the roster right between McGann and Eccleston. New discoveries are fun. Stories that take us somewhere unexpected are more rewarding than those that just reaffirm what we already assumed.

And while I thought McGann did a terrific job in "The Night of the Doctor," I don't think he would've worked as well in the role of the war-weary, broken-down, aged version of the Doctor as Hurt did. Having the War Doctor be elderly gave him a presence and texture that a younger man wouldn't have had, and a sharper contrast with the later Doctors. It brought something to the character that we haven't really seen since Hartnell. That's no mere stunt casting -- it's the right casting for what the role needed. Really, I wouldn't trade Hurt's performance for anything. I'd gladly see McGann's Doctor return somewhere, somehow, but he didn't belong here.

Paul McGann could've pulled it off he's hardly a young man anymore.

 

[Sindatur]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

The special was of course written after Eccleston turned down the chance to be in it.

I read he'd written the outlines for both the possibility of Eccleston returned and the one not.

Anyway, I don't quite believe Moffat there. Eccleston as the War Doctor? Unlikely. Unless it was the Ninth early on, and like, a day or two after his regeneration.

But really, if any previous Doctor were to do this, it'd be Paul McGann. Can't see why it'd have been so difficult for him to realize this - the War Doctor himself was pretty Doctor-ish in behaviour, too.

Then again... it WAS stunt casting, so it makes sense.

Yea, if it'd been Eccelston, I can't see it working, unless McGann did most of the Time War stuff, and Regenerated into Eccelston, who immediately decided to take a last drastic action or two (The Moment and maybe one or two of the others, but, McGann would've had to share in the minor atrocities, IMHO). Sure Eccelston could've been around for a bit, and been busy with The Time War is why he hadn't seen a mirror since Regenerating. But, it just doesn't feel right.

Maybe it's "personal Canon" bias, but, I've always believed *"The Moment" caused The Doctor to Regenerate (IE: Cost him a Regeneration), and it's hard to accept that the only cost was the Guilt (BTW, not trying to take away how expensive that Guilt cost was)

*And at first we didn't even know what the Final Atrocity was that actually ended the War, correct?

 

[RoJoHen]

Re: A thought on regenerations (spoilers for "Night/Day of the Doctor"

*And at first we didn't even know what the Final Atrocity was that actually ended the War, correct?

For a long time I had been under the impression that the Time Lock was the thing that the Doctor did to end the war. The Daleks and Time Lords weren't really dead; they were just locked away, lost forever, and they might as well have been dead because there was no way to bring them back

I'm not sure when that changed. It certainly didn't occur to me until relatively recently that the Doctor actually committed genocide.

And as it turned out, my original thought was actually what turned out to be the case. Even though the Doctor remembered it differently, he did in fact lock the Time Lords away, leaving them effectively dead to the universe.