Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2017 21:10:23 GMT
The Doctor explains in "The Day of the Doctor" that his earlier incarnations do not remember multi-Doctor adventures, only the latest one. Ah, true.... A different point occurs to me: there's also the business about one Timelord being able to recognize another, and she doesn't recognize him as one at all. I suppose the show has been more wishy-washy about that one. Well, Capali believed Missy was a robot at first so I think that's a very flexible Timelord gift only able to be used when the plot requires it.
|
|
|
Post by dasmaniac on Jun 26, 2017 21:10:34 GMT
I suppose there's one further question: even when Missy is alone, she seems not to understand what's going on. So, what happened that she forgot having been there, meeting herself, etc? Did she have to give herself amnesia so she would play it straight? Or is she in fact, The Nun? The Doctor explains in "The Day of the Doctor" that his earlier incarnations do not remember multi-Doctor adventures, only the latest one. The Eleventh Doctor also doesn't fully recall everything right away. He only gains the memories as he progresses through his adventure. It fits with one of the novels where the First Doctor returned to his timeline following the events of The Three Doctors. He returned with only a hazy recollection of the event just like Eleven with the War Doctor. It seems Time Lords sort of synchronize when multiple incarnations meet up.
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on Jun 26, 2017 21:34:50 GMT
And as I remarked in another thread re: BF's own two-master episode.... This means Beevers' Master was all horribly burnt up but must not have known why. How frustrating.
|
|
|
Post by christmastrenzalore on Jun 26, 2017 21:43:36 GMT
And as I remarked in another thread re: BF's own two-master episode.... This means Beevers' Master was all horribly burnt up but must not have known why. How frustrating. That would be somewhat hilarious, but the implication I got was that MacQueen changed events, using it as an opportunity to fake his own murder, since he knew he was gonna be mangled anyway, and at the end of the story, the Doctor rewrites events to the way they originally were.
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on Jun 26, 2017 21:49:57 GMT
re: two-masters Ah. Well, as with Vortex Ice, I'm going to need a relisten or two to nail down everything that happened in that ep/arc. I know the Doctor tried to fix things and "won", but didn't understand him to have undone everything, including the Master frying himself, etc. But then, I haven't listened to it in quite a while.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2017 22:07:09 GMT
No I really believe these are just paralleling what happened on Mondas. I can't see this ship escaping the black hole and delivering a cyberarmy to Mondas but we'll see. That's the way I saw it too, that the experiments were occuring on Mondas and this spaceship (possibly others).
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on Jun 26, 2017 22:44:18 GMT
No I really believe these are just paralleling what happened on Mondas. I can't see this ship escaping the black hole and delivering a cyberarmy to Mondas but we'll see. That's the way I saw it too, that the experiments were occuring on Mondas and this spaceship (possibly others). <struggles not to post about it again> <fails> Personally, I don't like having to make a bunch of stuff up and keep it in my head to make an episode consistent with the rest of the who-universe (which is one of many reasons why I'd really like one person to have the job of keeping things consistent). In every TV episode to talk about their origin, full cyber conversion started on Mondas, then spread. In Spare Parts, we end with the only thing less explicit than a narrator explanation: Zheng, not dead as believed, says "Doctorman Allen, we begin again", and we know from the episode Zheng can make that happen. There's also the committee-turned-Cyberplanner. So without further explanation, I cannot see how it is consistent with Tenth Planet, Spare Parts, and anything else said about cybermen in the past. I suppose we could play a linguistic game about words like "origin" or anything else used when the cybermen's beginning have been described, to make room for an idea where what happened on the ship was a continuation of something not actually completed on Mondas itself and is the *real* beginning or where the plans were perfected well before conversion on Mondas, such that the identical design despite different space-time locations of origin is explained. (ie, by saying that the people on the ship did come from Mondas, so in a sense it all started with Mondas, even if conversions actually started on the ship). I just don't like to do that. I want it consistent, or explained. I can at least pin my hopes on the possibility that this isn't the *real* origin, but rather the result of the Master trying to engineer an origin such that he controls the cybermen from the start. (And I really do think it's pointing that way given how thick the Master and Missy were laying it on at the very end.......) Anyway, I ought to be quiet for now. We'll just see what happens in the next ep. Fingers crossed that Moffat sticks a landing properly this time, because for all the apparent criticism posted, I really did quite enjoy that one. I really don't want another Hell Bent (and, I know, plenty did enjoy that). I want it to also be great. Fingers crossed.....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2017 22:57:35 GMT
That's the way I saw it too, that the experiments were occuring on Mondas and this spaceship (possibly others). <struggles not to post about it again> <fails> Personally, I don't like having to make a bunch of stuff up and keep it in my head to make an episode consistent with the rest of the who-universe (which is one of many reasons why I'd really like one person to have the job of keeping things consistent). In every TV episode to talk about their origin, full cyber conversion started on Mondas, then spread. In Spare Parts, we end with the only thing less explicit than a narrator explanation: Zheng, not dead as believed, says "Doctorman Allen, we begin again", and we know from the episode Zheng can make that happen. There's also the committee-turned-Cyberplanner. So without further explanation, I cannot see how it is consistent with Tenth Planet, Spare Parts, and anything else said about cybermen in the past. I suppose we could play a linguistic game about words like "origin" or anything else used when the cybermen's beginning have been described, to make room for an idea where what happened on the ship was a continuation of something not actually completed on Mondas itself and is the *real* beginning or where the plans were perfected well before conversion on Mondas, such that the identical design despite different space-time locations of origin is explained. (ie, by saying that the people on the ship did come from Mondas, so in a sense it all started with Mondas, even if conversions actually started on the ship). I just don't like to do that. I want it consistent, or explained. I can at least pin my hopes on the possibility that this isn't the *real* origin, but rather the result of the Master trying to engineer an origin such that he controls the cybermen from the start. (And I really do think it's pointing that way given how thick the Master and Missy were laying it on at the very end.......) Anyway, I ought to be quiet for now. We'll just see what happens in the next ep. Fingers crossed that Moffat sticks a landing properly this time, because for all the apparent criticism posted, I really did quite enjoy that one. I really don't want another Hell Bent (and, I know, plenty did enjoy that). I want it to also be great. Fingers crossed..... Haha! No reason why you shouldn't post about it again, sir For my money, you may be right. You want to hear something stupid? I am so not looking Peter C leaving the show (I haven't felt such a sense of impending loss since big Tom Baker fell of the gantry all those years ago - and it's just a TV show, I keep telling myself), that I'm not examining the possibilty of the events in World Enough and Time not fitting with what we know about The Tenth Planet and Spare Parts (both of which I love), because I don't want to detract from the excitement I'm getting from Doctor Who at the moment. I don't want the magic to be broken. That's the kind of turkey I am - and I love it! How many television shows effect us in this way? None! I'm guessing you might have to squint a little to fit everything together perfectly, but I've always been a squinter.
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on Jun 26, 2017 23:53:13 GMT
An interesting catch for Gallifrey Base: gallifreybase.com/forum/showthread.php?t=247014As I said there: That is actually a pretty good catch. I was actually just about to re-watch Smile, but I do seem to recall that exact band of tracks in the wheat towards the beginning.
Of course, it could just be a recycled shot turned 90 degrees.
Did you check for Drashigs in the ones with the greener grass?
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on Jun 26, 2017 23:55:04 GMT
<abbr title="Jun 26, 2017 18:57:35 GMT -4" data-timestamp="1498517855000" class="o-timestamp time">Jun 26, 2017 18:57:35 GMT -4</abbr> paz said: Haha! No reason why you shouldn't post about it again, sir For my money, you may be right. You want to hear something stupid? I am so not looking Peter C leaving the show (I haven't felt such a sense of impending loss since big Tom Baker fell of the gantry all those years ago - and it's just a TV show, I keep telling myself), that I'm not examining the possibilty of the events in World Enough and Time not fitting with what we know about The Tenth Planet and Spare Parts (both of which I love), because I don't want to detract from the excitement I'm getting from Doctor Who at the moment. I don't want the magic to be broken. That's the kind of turkey I am - and I love it! How many television shows effect us in this way? None! I'm guessing you might have to squint a little to fit everything together perfectly, but I've always been a squinter. I wish so very much that he had stayed on for another season or two. Arrrrgh! [Edit: or however many he felt like] A more important fingers-crossed: fingers crossed that he joins BF more or less immediately after regeneration. Fairly certain I heard someone here say they got the license extended to 2025 and even posted a link that I didn't follow. If so, hope that includes him. I also hope the theory that he's leaving because he just can't/won't deal with the pace of TV filming given his injury, etc., is true, because that means he should be able to deal with BF audio just fine. As for the back-and-forth re: whether this is an origin story or not, the problem with my mind is that it won't shut the **** up. So even if I agree with this - "I'm not examining the possibilty of the events in World Enough and Time not fitting with what we know about The Tenth Planet and Spare Parts (both of which I love), because I don't want to detract from the excitement I'm getting from Doctor Who at the moment. I don't want the magic to be broken. That's the kind of turkey I am - and I love it!" - I just can't help myself. My brain spits out "hey, but, what about this? What about that? HUH?!"..... and it's my brain, so I have to listen even if I intend to dismiss it.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jun 27, 2017 0:24:37 GMT
Haha! No reason why you shouldn't post about it again, sir For my money, you may be right. You want to hear something stupid? I am so not looking Peter C leaving the show (I haven't felt such a sense of impending loss since big Tom Baker fell of the gantry all those years ago - and it's just a TV show, I keep telling myself), that I'm not examining the possibilty of the events in World Enough and Time not fitting with what we know about The Tenth Planet and Spare Parts (both of which I love), because I don't want to detract from the excitement I'm getting from Doctor Who at the moment. I don't want the magic to be broken. That's the kind of turkey I am - and I love it! How many television shows effect us in this way? None! I'm guessing you might have to squint a little to fit everything together perfectly, but I've always been a squinter. I could not agree with you more. Capaldi has been a revelation at times and has made the biggest impression on me since Tom Baker. The 9th Doctor should have stayed longer. I was ready for the 10th Doctor to leave. I would have liked 11 to stick around a little longer but his departure hasn't gutted me the way 12's has. I feel like he is just really hitting his stride. Easily leaving a series or two too soon.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2017 5:44:06 GMT
That's the way I saw it too, that the experiments were occuring on Mondas and this spaceship (possibly others). <struggles not to post about it again> <fails> Personally, I don't like having to make a bunch of stuff up and keep it in my head to make an episode consistent with the rest of the who-universe (which is one of many reasons why I'd really like one person to have the job of keeping things consistent). In every TV episode to talk about their origin, full cyber conversion started on Mondas, then spread. In Spare Parts, we end with the only thing less explicit than a narrator explanation: Zheng, not dead as believed, says "Doctorman Allen, we begin again", and we know from the episode Zheng can make that happen. There's also the committee-turned-Cyberplanner. So without further explanation, I cannot see how it is consistent with Tenth Planet, Spare Parts, and anything else said about cybermen in the past. I suppose we could play a linguistic game about words like "origin" or anything else used when the cybermen's beginning have been described, to make room for an idea where what happened on the ship was a continuation of something not actually completed on Mondas itself and is the *real* beginning or where the plans were perfected well before conversion on Mondas, such that the identical design despite different space-time locations of origin is explained. (ie, by saying that the people on the ship did come from Mondas, so in a sense it all started with Mondas, even if conversions actually started on the ship). I just don't like to do that. I want it consistent, or explained. I can at least pin my hopes on the possibility that this isn't the *real* origin, but rather the result of the Master trying to engineer an origin such that he controls the cybermen from the start. (And I really do think it's pointing that way given how thick the Master and Missy were laying it on at the very end.......) Anyway, I ought to be quiet for now. We'll just see what happens in the next ep. Fingers crossed that Moffat sticks a landing properly this time, because for all the apparent criticism posted, I really did quite enjoy that one. I really don't want another Hell Bent (and, I know, plenty did enjoy that). I want it to also be great. Fingers crossed..... I agree we should wait till next week. Far too early to be conclusive either way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2017 5:50:53 GMT
I think I've said this somewhere else before, but Capaldi's departure from the role feels almost exactly like Davison's. By The Five Doctors, we finally had a Fifth Doctor who felt comfortable in his own skin with some strong stories to back him up... And then he has to go. The Twelfth Doctor has gone from the controversial incarnation who wasn't allowed to defend himself to an emulation of the Eleventh Doctor to finally coming into his own circa The Pilot. Everything has clicked together marvellously with Bill and Nardole. Even this series's arc feels as though it's genuinely meant something. Personally, I think Rona Munro gave us the definitive Twelfth Doctor in her story... And now he has to go. It's a shame.
Credit to the RTD era, it felt as though the Tenth Doctor had lived all of his life to his fullest, so when he left, it was a catharsis of sorts. If the Eleventh Doctor feels as though he has holes in his life (his first meeting with Vastra, etc.), the Twelfth feels like we've skipped from Inferno to The Time Warrior and lost everything in between. I reckon we're going to see many new stories and companions flood that gap between Hell Bent (or Heaven Sent, if you want to wipe that episode from existence) and The Husbands of River Song.
|
|
|
Post by TinDogPodcast on Jun 27, 2017 6:51:43 GMT
At what point does cyber conversion go bad?
Peole with spinal damage walking
Wearing glasses.
Voice box use.
New joints.
Automatically adjusting insulin pumps.
All perfectly fine.
But when do us low grade cyborgs become cybermen?
And why is it bad?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2017 7:45:31 GMT
At what point does cyber conversion go bad? Peole with spinal damage walking Wearing glasses. Voice box use. New joints. Automatically adjusting insulin pumps. All perfectly fine. But when do us low grade cyborgs become cybermen? And why is it bad? Killing Ground had a brilliant answer to that -- it's not when they scoop out your eyes, sever your arms and legs, tear away your skin. No, the true horror of the Cybermen is the death of self, the removal of personality in favour of a manufactured simulacra, a cipher. It's when the need to survive outweighs the need to be alive.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Jun 27, 2017 8:54:24 GMT
Amy was killed off. She was killed by a Weeping Angel sending her back in time to join her husband in the past. "Never said it did" One of many examples of you doing just that. Someone explains a difference between a character dying on screen (being killed off) and a character living another fifty years off-screen. You don't actually try to explain why you think being shot dead at thirty is exactly the same as being transported to the past at 30 then living another fifty years. You just repeat that the character was "killed off". The main method of a Weeping Angel kill is to send its victim to the past and feed off the time energy. The Weeping Angel sent Amy and Rory back. They were killed on-screen.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Jun 27, 2017 8:57:50 GMT
As I see it, it doesn't contradict Spare Parts, rather works alongside it. I wn't say anymore as you haven't seen it. I'd hate to spoil it for you! I dunno. The Tenth Planet, Spare Parts, etc, had them quite clearly originating on Mondas. This had them quite clearly originating on a space ship from Mondas. These are the very same models shown in The Tenth Planet, just brushed up for higher quality filming techniques. Is this just what Mondassians like to do in response to an environmental threat, and the Doctor just never found out about it? Then it should have happened any number of places. I suppose there are other cyborg creatures in-universe, but still, the Cybermen have been rather iconic. And again, it's the exact same model used as in Tenth Planet. Even with convergent evolution in life, we don't end up with two creatures that look exactly the same - they just share whatever useful trait helped them evolve. Ie, the two succulents here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_evolutionFurther, they were adapting to a freezing planet on Mondas whereas here they were adapting to a polluted bottom layer of the ship (which raises its own questions). Perhaps someone might think it logical to remove emotions if one believes one's species will be forever consigned to live on an otherwise lifeless frozen rock. But would they feel the same if the idea is simply to be able to temporarily survive some pollution as one struggles to the nose of the ship? Wouldn't you instead just focus on developing really good air filters and long-lasting oxygen tanks? Slowly deploying stores of oxygen farther and farther up? etc. It doesn't make any sense to go "well, there's a lot of pollution we'll have to walk through. Better rip our organs, our emotions, and everything but logic out to walk through it". If Moffat had a history of showing more respect towards continuity across the entire show, I might be inclined to believe that this really was supposed to be an unbelievably unlikely coincidence where Mondassians on a polluted ship not only embraced the same solution as Mondassians on a freezing world, but separately came up with the exact same design for dealing with these two very different environmental problems. However, I suspect he just wanted to have *his* own origin story, perhaps even betting most viewers would simply treat it as the only origin story because they haven't seen The Tenth Planet. The Tenth Planet isn't an origin story. Plus: who's to say the blueprints for a MondasIan Cyberman from Mondas weren't on the colony ship?
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on Jun 27, 2017 14:09:05 GMT
"Never said it did" One of many examples of you doing just that. Someone explains a difference between a character dying on screen (being killed off) and a character living another fifty years off-screen. You don't actually try to explain why you think being shot dead at thirty is exactly the same as being transported to the past at 30 then living another fifty years. You just repeat that the character was "killed off". The main method of a Weeping Angel kill is to send its victim to the past and feed off the time energy. The Weeping Angel sent Amy and Rory back. They were killed on-screen. Your personal definition of the word "kill" does not become the English definition simply because you think it's a neat idea. In other words, no, that isn't what "killed" or "killed off" means. And in point of fact, 11 is surprised in the S5 angels' episodes specifically because they are killing their victims by snapping their necks instead of sending them back in time, which the Doctor, like everyone else, does not consider to be "killing" because it does not involve making the person dead. Such a ridiculous thing to dispute.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Jun 27, 2017 18:54:57 GMT
The main method of a Weeping Angel kill is to send its victim to the past and feed off the time energy. The Weeping Angel sent Amy and Rory back. They were killed on-screen. Your personal definition of the word "kill" does not become the English definition simply because you think it's a neat idea. In other words, no, that isn't what "killed" or "killed off" means. And in point of fact, 11 is surprised in the S5 angels' episodes specifically because they are killing their victims by snapping their necks instead of sending them back in time, which the Doctor, like everyone else, does not consider to be "killing" because it does not involve making the person dead. Such a ridiculous thing to dispute. He's surprised because they are using a brutal way to kill as opposed to their usual kind method of murder. Sending someone back in time and feeding off their time energy is murder IMO.
|
|
|
Post by charlesuirdhein on Jun 27, 2017 19:12:57 GMT
Your personal definition of the word "kill" does not become the English definition simply because you think it's a neat idea. In other words, no, that isn't what "killed" or "killed off" means. And in point of fact, 11 is surprised in the S5 angels' episodes specifically because they are killing their victims by snapping their necks instead of sending them back in time, which the Doctor, like everyone else, does not consider to be "killing" because it does not involve making the person dead. Such a ridiculous thing to dispute. He's surprised because they are using a brutal way to kill as opposed to their usual kind method of murder. Sending someone back in time and feeding off their time energy is murder IMO. It's not though. It's a pain for those it happens to, but barring whatever THEN happens to them in the past, they're NOT DEAD. And that point was made very clear in the very first story where Kathy writes to Sally and explains that she has HAD A FULL AND HAPPY LIFE. You're conflating being removed from the ongoing narrative with character death, and it's not. An analogy would be Rose's initial trapping on Pete's World which she could never return from. Awful, but we don't count that as death.
|
|