Stories you disregard

[Peter the Younger]

^ Agreed

 

[ITL]

One little thing changing in the past can cause things to change in the future (or in the future-past). That's one reason why there is no such thing as Doctor Who canon. It would be an impossible thing.

There's the convoluted history of The Daleks, for a start...

 

[OmahaStar]

One little thing changing in the past can cause things to change in the future (or in the future-past). That's one reason why there is no such thing as Doctor Who canon. It would be an impossible thing.

There's the convoluted history of The Daleks, for a start...

Child: "Mommy, where did the Daleks come from?"
Mother: "Mortons, son."

They're like cockroaches. Every time you think they're finished for good, they're back and have a new creation story.

 

[Starkers]

the awful episodes like Fear Her, or any sixth Doctor story.

That's it. I'm sending my friend Achmed to keeel you!

Sorry, I really will stop now, I promise.

I would apologise to Six but I fear it would be a Gene Hunt apology which would just land me in more hot water.

 

[FalTorPan]

I'm not much of a fan of the John Nathan Turner era of Doctor Who, but I don't disregard any of the television episodes or the 1996 telefilm.

 

[Silent_Bob]

I ignore "Love and monsters", purely because it stopped being an episode of Doctor Who and instead turned into "hey look its me Peter Kay, aren't i funny?" the second that tit appeared on screen.

 

[Fenric]

I only Ignore one line and that is the 8th doctor telling me 'he's half human'

 

[Stevil2001]

The Doctor grinned. 'My dear, one of the things you'll learn is that it's all real. Every word of every novel is real, every frame of every movie, every panel of every comic strip.'

'But that's just not possible. I mean some books contradict other ones and -'

The Doctor was ignoring her.


(The Gallifrey Chronicles by Lance Parkin)

 

[diankra]

What about where one story openly contradicts another?

You mean like The Talons of Weng-Chiang stating that 5000AD Earth was the time of World War VI and a scientific dark age instigated by the likes of Magnus Greel, while the next story (in production order), The Invisible Enemy, states it's the time of the Great Breakout, when Humanity first expanded out into the galaxy beyond the inner solar system (which in itself contradicts so many stories about the glaxy spanning 25th-30th century Earth Empire, one of them written by the same writers as Invisible Enemy!).

 

[Captain Pike]

I don't disregard any at all, but the McGann movie probably comes closest.

There are others that are as annoying or awful, but the '96 movie was just a perfect storm of bad ideas and nonsensical plot..

 

[Tomalak]

What about where one story openly contradicts another?

You mean like The Talons of Weng-Chiang stating that 5000AD Earth was the time of World War VI and a scientific dark age instigated by the likes of Magnus Greel, while the next story (in production order), The Invisible Enemy, states it's the time of the Great Breakout, when Humanity first expanded out into the galaxy beyond the inner solar system (which in itself contradicts so many stories about the glaxy spanning 25th-30th century Earth Empire, one of them written by the same writers as Invisible Enemy!).

Well that's not irreconcilable. The best and brightest left the planet, leaving Earth at the mercy of the nutcase Icelandic and Filipinos.

 

[Cutter John]

What about where one story openly contradicts another?

You mean like The Talons of Weng-Chiang stating that 5000AD Earth was the time of World War VI and a scientific dark age instigated by the likes of Magnus Greel, while the next story (in production order)....etc, etc.

Well that's not irreconcilable. The best and brightest left the planet, leaving Earth at the mercy of the nutcase Icelandic and Filipinos.

Star Trek has humanity going from nuclear winter, to a spacegoing race in less than a century. So I don't see the problem. One of Who's ongoing messages is that no matter how bad things get, humans will always pull themselves back up.

 

[Candlelight]

One of Who's ongoing messages is that no matter how bad things get, humans will always pull themselves back up.

The Cult of Skaro mention that very fact heavily in Daleks in Manhatten.

I don't really disregard anything, but I do simply ignore them.

Victory of the Daleks comes to mind. Am still hoping the new Daleks will fall off a cliff and the old Daleks will return.

Not that I'm vindictive or petty about the new design, but it is my preference.

 

[Sparky]

I disregard anything that is not seen onscreen. Other than that it is all Wibbly Wobbly Timey Wimey.

 

[EJA]

What about where one story openly contradicts another?

You mean like The Talons of Weng-Chiang stating that 5000AD Earth was the time of World War VI and a scientific dark age instigated by the likes of Magnus Greel, while the next story (in production order), The Invisible Enemy, states it's the time of the Great Breakout, when Humanity first expanded out into the galaxy beyond the inner solar system (which in itself contradicts so many stories about the glaxy spanning 25th-30th century Earth Empire, one of them written by the same writers as Invisible Enemy!).

I personally just ignore the line about the year 5000 being that of the Great Breakout in "The Invisible Enemy", regard it as erroneous. I sometimes feel like doing that with the dialogue in "The Waters of Mars" refererring to appalling weather conditions on Earth in the 2050s, when "The Moonbase" established Earth as having perfected weather control by that time.

Much harder to reconcile are the wildly different portrayals of Earth's destruction in "The Ark", "Frontios", and "The End of the World." Here is where I think we just have to look on the first two stories as apocryphal, i.e. pretend they never happened.

 

[Candlelight]

Much harder to reconcile are the wildly different portrayals of Earth's destruction in "The Ark", "Frontios", and "The End of the World." Here is where I think we just have to look on the first two stories as apocryphal, i.e. pretend they never happened.

The Ark is fair accurate when compared to The End of the World, as in the Earth is still consumed by the sun. Only the time frame is off, which would be attributed to William Hartnell fluffing his lines.

 

[diankra]

What about where one story openly contradicts another?

You mean like The Talons of Weng-Chiang stating that 5000AD Earth was the time of World War VI and a scientific dark age instigated by the likes of Magnus Greel, while the next story (in production order), The Invisible Enemy, states it's the time of the Great Breakout, when Humanity first expanded out into the galaxy beyond the inner solar system (which in itself contradicts so many stories about the glaxy spanning 25th-30th century Earth Empire, one of them written by the same writers as Invisible Enemy!).

Well that's not irreconcilable. The best and brightest left the planet, leaving Earth at the mercy of the nutcase Icelandic and Filipinos.

Fair point: that's roughly the idea Tat and Lawrence suggest in the relevant About Time book - that the Breakout was refugees getting away from the dictatorships.

 

[diankra]

What about where one story openly contradicts another?

You mean like The Talons of Weng-Chiang stating that 5000AD Earth was the time of World War VI and a scientific dark age instigated by the likes of Magnus Greel, while the next story (in production order), The Invisible Enemy, states it's the time of the Great Breakout, when Humanity first expanded out into the galaxy beyond the inner solar system (which in itself contradicts so many stories about the glaxy spanning 25th-30th century Earth Empire, one of them written by the same writers as Invisible Enemy!).

I personally just ignore the line about the year 5000 being that of the Great Breakout in "The Invisible Enemy", regard it as erroneous. I sometimes feel like doing that with the dialogue in "The Waters of Mars" refererring to appalling weather conditions on Earth in the 2050s, when "The Moonbase" established Earth as having perfected weather control by that time.

Much harder to reconcile are the wildly different portrayals of Earth's destruction in "The Ark", "Frontios", and "The End of the World." Here is where I think we just have to look on the first two stories as apocryphal, i.e. pretend they never happened.

There's not much contradiction between those three stoires, apart from the timing (which is only the Doctor's guess in The Ark) and the number of evacuation ships (which was covered in a deleted scene from End of the World, when Cassandra talked about 'The Arks').

 

[The Doctor]

Are there any DW stories that fans of the programme treat in the same way (Apart from the obvious Dimensions in Time)?

Everything before "Rose".

This.