| | #31 (permalink) | |
| Comment Giver | Re: 32.04: The Doctor's Wife Quote:
The only water in the forest is a river... seems to fit that, but I'm prepared to be wrong. Tom Baker didn't have a mobile phone? What did he want one of them for? He tricked people into eating Jelly Babies, which were in fact Symbiotic Telepathic Connection Modifiers that allowed him to keep contact with whoever ate one. It's how he knows what every one of his companions has been up to, when asked in The Sarah Jane Adventures... There you go sorted. ![]() Now that's retconning | |
| | |
| | #32 (permalink) |
| ...Prepare Thyself | Re: 32.04: The Doctor's Wife Please can we sack the script writers.. "Lost in Space" and "Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea" have more interest than what this motley crew are churning out. Do they ever look at the older episodes or have any knowledge of the traditions and national institution they messing about with. All that money and effort and career low points the actors will endure just to get a cryptic message that is of no use to anyone, let alone Who, which in the past would have been displayed on the screen/terminal. WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY would something of the supposed ability of the TARDIS resort to leaving a load of nonsense in this way. Why not just say Hey Who, Yes you over there; this is what's going to happen to you and this is what you need to know. |
| | |
| | #33 (permalink) | |
| Brian G. Turner | Re: 32.04: The Doctor's Wife When I saw the title for this coming episode was "The Doctor's Wife" I was looking forward to finally seeing more of the River Song plot develop in a sure and solid way. As soon as I saw Neil Gaiman on the credits, I knew we wouldn't get that, but that we should get something good anyway - and wasn't left disappointed. It was a good strong filler episode, but the teasing about other timelords ... is a tease. It's great to hear of them, it's frustrating we never see any of them. Plot problem though - why did the creature need the Tardis when it had already had a few? And as Dave mentioned, if there were no more left, what was the advantage of the creature moving into our universe? Also: Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #34 (permalink) |
| We're all mad here. Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: City of Edinburgh
Posts: 17
| Re: 32.04: The Doctor's Wife Something I've just noticed is missing from this episode (well, two things) unless i've missed it: Eye-patch lady Amy's pregnancy. Perhaps something to do with the fact that they're outside of the universe? Is Amy only pregnant when she's in the universe? Also, another conversation about how Rory waited 2000 years for Amy. Perhaps we'll see Rory leave at the end of the series, either dying (again) or just going home for the simple reason that, he's waited 2000 years for her before, he can wait a little bit longer. |
| | |
| | #35 (permalink) |
| Flaming Poltergeist | Re: 32.04: The Doctor's Wife Eye Patch Lady (which now seems to be her official name, saw in on Wikipedia and everything!) wasn't in this episode, but pretty sure I spotted her in the trailer for the next one. Creepy woman. But definitely a talking point! I think House finally cottoned on that he could take over a TARDIS rather than just chewing them down ("I should have done this millions of years ago..." or something similar I recall him saying) and I guess, not being a Time Lord or anything, he couldn't actually build one despite having all the parts there. I guess his deciding to go off was just playing his final card. If the Doctor was telling the truth about being the last, if he stayed where he was, he'd die of...hunger? But going off, he could at least check for himself, or find a new source of food. Maybe that's another reason why he's only just decided to go off in a TARDIS. Before, it was a lot easier to coax the food to him -- now he's got to go off and find it instead. |
| | |
| | #37 (permalink) | |
| Brian G. Turner | Re: 32.04: The Doctor's Wife Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #38 (permalink) |
| Certified Space Monkey Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Livingston, Scotland
Posts: 794
| Re: 32.04: The Doctor's Wife This was an interesting episode, referencing a few things from the past and also putting into canon the fact that a Time Lord can change gender when they regenerate. That certainly ends the argument of whether The Doctor could be played by a woman. I'm sure we'll all be able to go over all the episodes this series once it's finished and pick out important bits of information that we didn;t even know were there. I am in agreement that the "The only water in the forest is the river" must be about River Song. If it isn't, a lot of people are going to look foolish! There's actually a meme going around on Tumblr - "Rory died? It must be Saturday." And there's the comparisons to SG-1's Daniel Jackson, who died about 16 times, and Captain Jack Harkness. And for those following the Fourth Dimension hidden messages on the official Doctor Who website, we got an extra treat this week. The new message reads "to see what I saw, click on the spot beyond the Doctor's home planet" - click on the full stop at the end of the message and you will be taken to a short video (highlight to read) |
| | |
| | #39 (permalink) |
| |-O-| (-O-) |-O-| Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Essex
Posts: 2,478
| Re: 32.04: The Doctor's Wife Just watched this now and it really brought a tear to the eye. I don't really have much exposure to Dr. Who, but this makes me want to get more involved, including the older Dr. Who. Matt Smith is superb. |
| | |
| | #40 (permalink) |
| Brian G. Turner | Re: 32.04: The Doctor's Wife Neil Gaiman publishes a Q&A on the research, scripting, and production of The Doctor's Wife here: http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2011/0...-q-mostly.html |
| | |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Rate This Thread | |
| |