Discussion in 'Doctor Who' started by JoeZhang, May 15, 2022.
Why would the Moment be hanging out with the Brigadier in the old-folks home?
Who's 'splitting hairs'? The Timeless Children flat-out says that Brendan and his story existed only in the Matrix as an obscuration of the truth of the Timeless Child and their story.
Eh, here's the thread from 2017 where we discuss the interview in which Moffat reveals he originally intended the Curator to be the Moment, though apparently the original interview (linked in the thread) doesn't exist anymore.
'Kay. Still doesn't change the fact there's no proof the Curator is the Doctor. Indeed, I'd say Brendan can make a far more credible claim to being the Doctor than the Curator, given Brendan is at least meant to be a representation of the Doctor.
Lots of historical irony in that thread, from "if Tennant were to ever play a future incarnation of the Doctor, which I doubt," to elaborate fan-theories accounting for the Morbius Doctors, to predictions that possibly the most big-C Conservative era of Doctor Who would be too "woke." Good Lord, thinking about the Thirteenth "It's important to be complicit in historical atrocities so 2022 can become the perfect moral culmination of the human race, vindicating the terrible cost of learning those lessons" Doctor being some crusader for women's liberation is mind-boggling.
Which should have been patently obvious from the get go and yet here we are...
I disagree, especially after I was able to find Moffat's comments on the matter in the following article:
And in that article we have this quote from Moffat:
Seems the original intentions are pretty clear to me.
His original intention changed in the final draft, as he emphasizes at the start of the article, to Tom Baker being a future incarnation of the Doctor using an older face.
There is no reference to final draft in that interview. Indeed, Moffat even said that when he was still thinking of the Curator as the Moment even when Tom Baker was cast. I suspect, that upon seeing all the various fan theories that the Curator was a future Doctor/the last Doctor, he took a liking to that idea and decided not to be dismissive about it.
Like I said back when that article first came out, I like that it's open to interpretation, regardless of what Moffat's original intentions were and what he ultimately decided on. Why must we have a concrete answer on this one? I think it's much better left vague.
The context in scene is what matters most to me.
Including the unspoken part, especially the unspoken part.
The Doctor clearly has the question: Hey, why do you look exactly like me when I was Tom Baker? written all over him.
While the audience goes one level deeper with: Hey, it’s Tom Baker, he was the fourth Doctor, but never loved that long to look that old, how can that be?
To which the onscreen Doctor replies in a cheeky manner: You might find yourself revisiting a few old faces in the future (like mine).
In that context, the implication is clear.
In no way does that scene say, hey, I am another incarnation of the Moment.
The plot twist is that the Curator is a pre-Hartnell Doctor with future knowledge of Gallifrey's fate, making the 4th Doctor actually the second time the Doctor has had that face.
When i saw Tom Baker appear this for me was the forth doctor back for the anniversary, and i needed no back story or explination as to how this could be, he was simply the forth doctor brought back for the fans.
Wibbley Wobbley Doctorey Whimey and "Hello. I'm the fugitive doctor"
I finally watched Power Of The Doctor - is the 14th Doctor supposed to be a reincarnation or throwback to 10?
All of the above.
Ok great, that answers my question perfectly
People assume regeneration is a strict progression from one incarnation to the next, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more of a big ball of regeney stuff.
Started well, that sentence.
Separate names with a comma.