• 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!

The prequel's up

That was sweet. I think everyone figured out the twist early, but it's not quite the same thing as Amy Pond, imo, just because the Doctor doesn't find out who she was (if little Clara were a recurring character, it would be different). Plus, we got to hear which accent she had, since that was a character trait of Clara last episode.
 
I think the term "prequel" was used to imply that it was attached to the "Bells of St. John" episode and that it takes place before that show, but that it's not necessarily required viewing and that you could as well see it afterwards or not at all if you so wish.

Well, yes, "prequel" has come to be interpreted to mean "any story preceding another story," but the point is that its strict definition is a story that's made/released after a story but set before it, i.e. a sequel that precedes. For example, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (set in 1935) is a prequel to Raiders of the Lost Ark (set in 1936) because it came out later, but Raiders is not a prequel to IJ & the Last Crusade (set in 1938) because it came out earlier. It's just a predecessor.

But, as stated, language is mutable and nuances of meaning like that tend to get blurred or ignored, and thus it's become common in the vernacular to use "prequel" for any preceding work whether it's made before or after.
 
To be fair, although it's released before, it was probably made after the episode.
 
I didn't see it coming even though it was right there. Did what it should do, whet our appetites and reminded us of the Clara plotline. Even allowed us to have a reflective moment with the Doctor which is sometimes missed during episodes running at breakneck speed.
 
That was charming as hell. Shame it'll probably be the last time we see the tweed jacket. I imagine they probably used it here because there's something more fun and "playful" about it than the Doctor's new, darker coat.

And I guess I'm the only who didn't think it would be Clara -- just because the little girl looked nothing whatsoever like Jenna Louise Coleman. Lol
 
I guess it kinda makes sense in this case. Its just whatever force that's pushing the Doctor and Clara together doing its thing again.
 
Last edited:
I think he means in connection to The Snowman, where we had common Clara and posh Clara :)

Yeah. I can't remember how she sounded in the Dalek episode, though. I guess the posh accent could have just been for the benefit of the kids. I just remember when she got scared and her accent changed and the kids pointed it out to her.
 
I'll admit I didn't realize the twist until the mom mentioned the girl's name. It was a nice little scene, and makes me anxious for Saturday!
 
you mean like Russell T "Hang on what if the new companion had a mum who was a bit of a harridan?" Davies?
RTD delivered the exact same series finale 4 times. It's impressive he got away with it.
Agreed, on both counts.

Having said that, neither RTD or Moffat is perfect. It is interesting that the one's tendency to repeat himself seems to draw rather less criticism and commentary than the other's does, though.


It was enjoyable fluff and not a lot more than that, but Matt Smith seems able to make even fluff look much more brilliant than it ought to. I'm going to miss his Doctor a very great deal whenever he leaves the role.
 
That was a sweet two minutes :)

And I feel like the only one who didn't realize it was Clara till the end, they duped me.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top