Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!
^^yeah, lots of great speculation but it's just that - fan speculation. I'm still convinced it's part of the story somehow. Otherwise, it would have been no effort to give us a throwaway line to explain it. They've explained less significant things. I've been with this show since '76 and the TARDIS changing like that is a pretty major thing to gloss over. Even when it was interdimensionally dispersed and reassembled, it didn't change like that. (of course, budget was more restrictive back then)
I guess we really never have seen the Tardis as damaged as it was by Ten's regeneration (although one might suppose it got similarly battered during the Time War.)
Certainly trying to stave off the regeneration for as long as the 10th Doctor did can't be healthy. Imagine how messy other bodily functions get when you try holding it for too long.
Was there really a problem with shooting the old TARDIS control room in HD? I thought that Moffat just changed the look because he wanted to set his era apart from the RTD era in strong visual ways. In addition to the redesigned console room, we also got a refreshed TARDIS exterior, new opening title sequence, new version of the theme song, new Daleks, a new companion, and of course a new Doctor.
I wouldn't worry about it. No one remembers the British landing spacecraft on Mars in 1970; or the Cybermen attacking the Earth in 1986; or the bloody Loch Ness Monster attacking a building on the banks of the River Thames.
True enough. Personally, I prefer it when humanity overall seems to rationalize away all of the spectacular alien invasions and things, like they seemed to at the end of "World War III" or the way Donna kept missing everything. Maybe that attitude of mine is just a holdover from my love of Buffy/Angel where people would always rationalize away the most rediculous things rather than accept the truth about the supernatural. (They thought Spike's vampires were a gang on PCP in "School Hard." Xander somehow convinced all of the hypnotized parents that they had just been participating in a scavenger hunt in "Bad Eggs." Even when the Beast made fire rain down on Los Angeles and blotted out the sun for 5 episodes, most people still rationalized that it was some sort of meteor thing.)
As for why Amy didn't remember the Daleks, I didn't think that that had anything to do with Amy's proximity to the crack. I thought the implication was that the invading Daleks that she would have seen had fallen into a crack, thus erasing everyone's memories of them.
As I understand it, the recreated universe was extrapolated from the regenerative light of the Pandorica channeled through the TARDIS explosion. The only thing that Amy really recreated on her own was the Doctor. The Doctor couldn't be recreated by the Pandorica because he was inside it, on the inside of the TARDIS explosion.
Which actually brings me to a new theory about who the "Silence will fall" guy is. What if it's the 11th Doctor? Think about it, the Doctor crossed over to the other side of the crack so that the cracks would seal. Theoretically, the Doctor is still there on the other side. The Doctor recreated by Amy is a copy, exactly the same in every detail but still not the original. What if, trapped on the other side in the fire at the end of the universe, the original Doctor went evil & insane and decided to destroy the universe, and thus caused the very TARDIS explosion that created him in the first place. It would certainly fit in with Moffat's penchant for predestination paradoxes.
