1051 réponses à ce sujet

[Sifr]

The 'exploiting a man in his final moments' thing had me with my hand over my mouth. I didn't expect that from the Doctor. At all.

 

And that's great. I love what Tucker Capaldi's doing with the role.

 

 

Despite that, I'd say the doctor's definitely a good man. He's just getting a little more... pragmatic. 

 

The Twelfth seems to be ruthlessly pragmatic at times.

 

In "Deep Breath", when he refused to give her the screwdriver because he needed it more, it does have a twisted kind of logic to it. Clara would have wasted those precious seconds using the sonic on the door and not the droids in the room, which would have only succeeded in getting both herself captured along with him, since it'd be unlikely he'd manage to escape without it.

 

If he kept the Sonic however, he can sneak up on (remember, Time Lords can hold their breath for upto five minutes) and disable a corpse-droid, take it's face and clothes as a disguise, then return into the room to rescue Clara while she had the droids completely distracted?

 

He actually did need it more than she did!

 

Well...

 

 

I always thought the Tenth Doctor was referring to the Seventh Doctor in that scene, who was fond of manipulating people and talking his enemies into destroying themselves. While it might not have (always) been the Tenth's cup of tea, it's going to be interesting to see how far the Twelfth Doctor is willing to go in that direction, especially since the Great Intelligence namedropped the Valeyard in "The Name of the Doctor".

 

I actually think that the Twelfth Doctor's refusal to entertain the belief that he's a hero is actually right on the money. For one, he's always been more of an anti-hero and after the Eleventh saw how grand (and destructive) his legend had become in "A Good Man Goes to War", Twelve might think that returning to anonymity would be a good thing, both for himself and the universe at large?

[Abraham_uk]

I'm loving the new Doctor.

I wouldn't say I'm sold, because I never needed someone to sell me Peter Capaldi as the Doctor.

I had a feeling that he'd be amazing at this role and I am pleased that he proved me right.

 

If Deep Breath was the new Doctor discovering who he is, Into The Dalek is him coming into his own while asking questions about himself.

 

Robots delves into the Legend of The Doctor.

Does he see himself as a hero? No.

Is he a hero? Well, the Doctor doesn't get to choose. Robin Hood didn't get to choose his legendary status either.

 

Spoiler

 

I liked Robots of Sherwood a lot. Though I was a bit annoyed that for the purpose of comedy Capaldi was caricatured. I do get that this was a comedy episode, meaning Robin Hood is a bit silly, Clara Oswald becomes more whimsical, and Capaldi's Doctor becomes even grumpier. All in all a good episode that makes fun of itself, has some silliness whilst managing to continue the theme of exploring Capaldi's incarnation.

 

I feel that Into The Dalek had nailed the Peter Capaldi as The Doctor formula. He had the right blend of adventurous spirit, pragmatism, grumpiness, wonder, excitement and darkness. This episode exaggerated the grumpiness of the Doctor to the very extremes. Also I face palmed every time the Doctor and Robin Hood argued. Not necessary, and not all that funny.

 

Keep up the good work. If the worst episodes are at the same level of Robots of Sherwood, then I have little to worry about. So far this current series, even the low points have been fun and exciting whilst asking thought provoking questions.

 

 

My hope. Please continue the "Am I A Good Man?" theme. I love this question. It is a question that I often ask myself. So seeing a protagonist who has been around over a 1000 years reflect on this really excites me.

[Sifr]

My hope. Please continue the "Am I A Good Man?" theme. I love this question. It is a question that I often ask myself. So seeing a protagonist who has been around over a 1000 years reflect on this really excites me.

 

I hope they continue with this too.

 

The question of whether or not you can be a good person and still do morally dubious or bad things for the right reasons, is one of the best questions a character can ask themselves in fiction? It's something we've often seen Doctor Who explore before and with good reason, since he's such a complex character and most of his incarnations have played with this in one way or another?

 

It's also not without reason that the Doctor is one of the two characters with the largest entries in the Good Is Not Nice and Good Is Not Soft pages on TVTropes, with an entire section devoted to them the last time I checked.

 

_{(And it should be no surprise to anyone that the other character is Commander Shepard).}

[Abraham_uk]

Has anyone watched the recent Channel 4 conspiracy thriller Utopia?

 

Spoiler

 

So a hostile is about to release a deadly virus that will kill an unthinkable number of people.

Ian who is without a shadow of a doubt a "good man" shoots the guy in the leg, hoping that the hostile will no longer be able to carry out the act.

 

The now wounded hostile is still trying to release the virus. The hostile isn't afraid to die and Ian doesn't want to kill the hostile. You see Ian hates killing.

Eventually he realises that he has no choice. Either kill this one person, or countless people die. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

 

Had Ian kept up the "good man" type morality he never would have shot the hostile. Lots of people could have died due to his inaction.

 

My conclusion, that Ian had to break his moral code. Ian immediately regretted his decision, but nevertheless morality failed him. Morality was unable to provide a squeaky clean solution. The only solution involved murder.

 

 

The Doctor faces a lot of challenging decisions. Sometimes the morally righteous decision isn't available. In those circumstances, "a good man" would be pretty useless. I guess I'm beginning to understand what Batman meant when he said "Hero that Gotham needs, but not the hero Gotham deserves."

[Sifr]

As Eleventh noted, "Good men don't need rules", before continuing on to admit that this was the reason he had many.

 

_{(Although I think the title of that episode actually refers to Rory, who's both a good man and a complete BAMF in that story.)}

 

As much as RTD's run increasingly bugged me in the later series, I will give him credit for making it a running theme that one reason why the Doctor takes companions is to keep him chained to the side of good and prevent him from going too far.

 

I think that's part of the reason why Eighth agreed to regenerate into a Warrior and reject the name of the Doctor at the end of his life. He was already travelling alone and when his latest prospective companion decided she'd rather die than have anything to do with him simply because he was a Time Lord, coupled with the Sisterhood's chastising him for his inaction and refusal to fight in the Time War, the amount of hopelessness and despair became too much for him to handle.

 

_{(Despite his acerbic wit at times, Eight always seemed to me to be one of the more sensitive incarnations. Even before the reveal about the War incarnation seperating him and Nine, it always made sense to me that the Ninth Doctor was so jaded because the Time War had caused Eight to lose all hope near the end of his life... and given "Night of the Doctor" and characterisation of the War Doctor, this theory still rings true imo).}

 

So, it's no wonder that with no companions to keep him in check and without any other choice (the first time around), the War Doctor ended up burning Gallifrey to end the Time War. Throw in the realisation that the Time Lords and the Daleks were prepared to destroy everything in the universe to win, he likely rationalised the act away as them forcing him to destroy them first?

[Abraham_uk]

Spoilers for both Dr Who and Mass Effect 3. You have been warned.

Spoiler

 

That's another reason why I love the theme "Am I A Good Man?"

That extreme moment where the Doctor nearly commits genocide.

Earlier on this thread someone described it as "The Moral Event Horizon".

 

Well, you know what? That would be an interesting revelation.

 

One of my favourite characters in Mass Effect is Javik.

Javik did a lot nasty mass murdering acts in the name of survival.

So, I don't have a problem with the Doctor doing stuff like that if it can be justifiable.

 

 

Ultimately when a hero does something morally questionable, I have no trouble with it as long as there is a good justification behind the action.

[Sifr]

Spoilers for both Dr Who and Mass Effect 3. You have been warned.

Spoiler

 

That's another reason why I love the theme "Am I A Good Man?"

That extreme moment where the Doctor nearly commits genocide.

Earlier on this thread someone described it as "The Moral Event Horizon".

 

Well, you know what? That would be an interesting revelation.

 

One of my favourite characters in Mass Effect is Javik.

Javik did a lot nasty mass murdering acts in the name of survival.

So, I don't have a problem with the Doctor doing stuff like that if it can be justifiable.

 

 

Ultimately when a hero does something morally questionable, I have no trouble with it as long as there is a good justification behind the action.

 

A quick digression on such themes in KOTOR 2 and ME3, with some spoilers.

 

Spoiler

KOTOR 2 had a great recurring plot thread about this very thing.

 

During the Mandalorian Wars, the Jedi Exile ignored the Jedi Council's edict to stay neutral and instead left with Revan's army to help defend the Republic. This eventually culminated in the Exile being the General who gave the order to drop a weapon of mass destruction on Malachor V, killing every living thing on the planet and ending the war in one fell swoop.

 

Throughout the game you're given numeous chances to tell other characters how you feel about this, either when they bring this part of your past up or when they challenge you on that decision. What made me love that game is that you repeatedly get the the dialogue option that allows you to admit that you feel guilt about pushing the button, but also have the option to refuse to apologise for it, as it was the right thing to do.

 

This is another reason why I wish that ME3 had explored more of the ramifications of Shepard's similar decision in "Arrival" to destroy the Alpha Relay and cause the death of all 300,000 people in the Bahak System, simply to give the galaxy another few months to prepare for the Reaper invasion. We only get one or two briefs scenes dealing with it in ME3 and Shepard's guilt, but for the most part it was forgotten.

 

After all, Shepard didn't stop the invasion, only delay it, so was it ultimately worth it or not? Asking those sorts of hard questions about your previous actions is something that could have made Allers a worthwhile character to have onboard, instead of just someone to fill Zaeed's old room.

 

What's great in Doctor Who is that people will call the Doctor out on those kinds of decisions and it's lead to some great storytelling moments. One of my favourite is that great line in "Family of Blood", when Joan quietly takes the Tenth Doctor to task for having caused so much death and destruction, simply because he needed somewhere to hide for a bit.

 

Joan: If the Doctor had never visited us, never chosen this place, on a whim... would anyone here have died?

[Sifr]

In regards to the new mystery of Series 8;

 

Does anyone else wonder if maybe the proto-TARDIS from back in Series 5's "The Lodger" might somehow be related to these various groups of droids who keep trying to repair their crashed spaceships? Like the droids in "Deep Breath" and "Robots in Sherwood", the proto-TARDIS also needed a vital component (a pilot) in order to fly, despite being too damaged that it would only ever burn up the people it tried to use as one, meaning it was always doomed to fail?

 

While I'd assumed it was related to the Silence, since the room they held Amy in "Day of the Moon" resembled it heavily, I don't know if it was ever fully confirmed that they had been the ones to create it or where it actually came from?

 

Knowing Moffat, it's not unlike him to seed major plot points into an episode a few years before they actually become important?

 

[Abraham_uk]

Guys. Watch the episode first.

You can read spoilers later.

 

Spoiler

Don't look at the spoiler.

Don't even think about the spoiler.

No. Definitely don't look at the spoiler.

 

Spoiler

 

Clara Oswald created a bunch of time travel paradoxes in that episode.

Creepy Oswald teaches you about fear whilst grabbing your ankle in the night. 

 

Seriously if I wrote on a door, "Don't Open" you'd open it, wouldn't you?

 

 

I told you not to look at the spoiler!

Ugh. You'll never learn.

 

 

 

 

Yeah I actually liked the episode. Obviously I can't say much, but it was well acted, had some really interesting moments.

Some of the editing was a bit strange. 

 

We learn some new stuff. Though some of the new information is confusing and there are "references" to other Dr Who episodes you might not get.

 

Previous episodes you can go into great lengths talking about stuff while remaining spoiler free, but this one even saying that stuff happens is a spoiler.

[Eternal Phoenix]

Spoiler

So those whole "stalkers" were the Doctor's imagination? What caused them then? How can his imagination manifest into reality? A nice episode but anti-climatic as I was expecting him to confront some sinister looking terror. Unless the whole ending had the Doctor learn not to care about the stalkers of the darkness and we'll find out what they are some other time.

[Abraham_uk]

Spoiler

So those whole "stalkers" were the Doctor's imagination? What caused them then? How can his imagination manifest into reality? A nice episode but anti-climatic as I was expecting him to confront some sinister looking terror. Unless the whole ending had the Doctor learn not to care about the stalkers of the darkness and we'll find out what they are some other time.

 

 

Spoiler

 

Perhaps this will feed into the Missy Mystery. Perhaps?

Or maybe the stalkers were Clara Oswald all along. Because she is a very creepy lady...

 

It's nice to have a monster that you can't see. Just leave it to your imagination to conjure up something terrifying.

 

What have I told you about reading spoilers?
Guys come on now.

[Let me know when this joke gets old].

 

[Sifr]

Spoiler

So those whole "stalkers" were the Doctor's imagination? What caused them then? How can his imagination manifest into reality? A nice episode but anti-climatic as I was expecting him to confront some sinister looking terror. Unless the whole ending had the Doctor learn not to care about the stalkers of the darkness and we'll find out what they are some other time.

 

I think that it's probably going to be left ambiguous.

 

Spoiler

Clara was the explanation for the one under his bed and it's entirely possible that the one in young Danny's room was another kid in the home pulling a prank, but whatever was outside the door at the end of the universe was probably real. Of course, it could easily have been the same kind of entity that the Doctor met in "Midnight", which was also never explained.

 

As for the references to previous episodes;

 

Spoiler

The similar mysterious thing outside a ship on a desolate planet like in "Midnight", the mention of his lonely childhood in "The Girl in the Fireplace", the Ninth Doctor mentioning that he knows what it's like to be "a child left out, alone in the cold" in "The Empty Child", and the Tenth Doctor mentioning he once had a brother in "Smith and Jones" (unless he was obliquely referring to his former friendship with the Master)

 

And I'm likely what they're doing with Clara this series. Her first series with Matt Smith was a little iffy because while they had great chemistry, the stories focussed more on the mystery of her as being "The Impossible Girl" rather than who she was as a person. I think she's more fun to watch with Capaldi because of how much they bicker like an old married couple, coupled with the great development of her burgeoning relationship with Danny.

[LPPrince]

I took a nap for a little over 3 hours today, and had several dreams throughout, all unrelated to one another.

 

One of them was me being an outside observer to some events of Doctor Who that haven't happened yet, where Twelve was telling this other lass that she had a great mind for exploration and companionship, while Clara seemed more distant at the time and distracted. Clara heard that, and I guess they talked about it at some point. Eventually the question came up of whether Clara approved of this other girl, but the answer wasn't given. Then somehow people in Clara's personal life showed up and Clara quickly went off and left the Doctor to be with them, but not before saying, "She's kickass" before she left. 

 

So I guess in the dream world The Doctor got a new companion. Man, dreams are weird.

[Sifr]

I'm starting to think that "Dad skills" is probably my favourite Twelfth Doctor moment thus far.

 

[Gtdef]

I really wanted last episode to introduce another creepy thing. Instead we got the impossible girl treatment

[Abraham_uk]

I was wondering.

 

Imagine that you know nothing about Dr Who.

You've never heard about the show.

So you know nothing about the Doctor, regenerations, TARDIS, Daleks, Cybermen etc.

 

Literally zero knowledge about the show.

 

One day, a friend of yours starts watching the show and you decide to watch out of curiosity.

Will this hypothetical version of yourself have a clue what's going on?

 

 

Which New Who era is better suited to "Mr I know nothing about Dr Who?"

This is assuming you're watching a random episode of the show rather than an entire series from beginning to end.

 

Russell T Davis or Stephen Moffat.

 

 

 

Now ask yourself. Can Dr Who truly entice new fans? Or is the show only catering to people who watched the show from the first New Who Episode "Rose" and before that even...

[Abraham_uk]

I love Dr Who.

 

It's clever.

It's smart.

 

The show takes a lot of risks. It can be dark, imaginative and flat out strange.

It is because of Dr Who being my favourite show (and that's saying a lot given the amount of quality television that is being pumped out world wide), that I am beginning to be concerned for it's future.

 

Thing is, I'm worried that the show is becoming too convoluted and too reliant on viewers knowledge of previous New Who and even Classic Who knowledge to understand what is going on. Even to those who have been following the show, it can be tricky to follow.

 

Try explaining the enigmatic and confusing character that is River Song to someone who hasn't watched the show...

 

 

With all this in mind, how can the show attract new viewers? People who might give the show a shot might be put off with all of the references. I know that popular shows such as Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad and the rebooted Battlestar Galactica must be watched from beginning to end, but is that really a good thing for Dr Who? These other series are not meant to go on forever, whereas Dr Who is evidently wants to go on forever. This is a show that is presumably going to (or at least try to) outlive me [and I'm 25]. So perhaps if that is the goal of Dr Who, then maybe it shouldn't be too reliant on the audience's knowledge of past episodes, or otherwise it will not have the kind of extreme longevity that it's hoping for.

 

You see shows like Breaking Bad and Game of Thrones are about getting the bulk of the viewers from day one and keeping them hooked. Dr Who is a constantly evolving and changing show that is not only about getting loyal viewers (loyal Classic Who and loyal New Who) but also requires fresh blood to keep up it's endless momentum. The original fans of the show are in their 50's. So you have to entice people from all age groups, grab hook new fans and well. You see this is a gargantuan task. The only other kind of show that has this kind of challenge is soap operas.

 

I'm arguing that some of the convolution will put of anyone watching the show for the first time. This might work for a show that is meant to last less than 10 years, but not good for a show that's meant to last forever. Is anyone in agreement here?

[BadgerladDK]

 

Now ask yourself. Can Dr Who truly entice new fans? Or is the show only catering to people who watched the show from the first New Who Episode "Rose" and before that even...

 

Well, it wasn't so long ago that it sucked me in. Was randomly channel surfing and stumbled on Journey to the centre of the Tardis (well, Jenna Coleman's legs were what caught the eye first if I'm being honest), stuck around and was utterly sucked in, binge watched the seasons that are on Netflix and bought the rest. I'd avoided it up to that point, basically for the reason you mention: So much backstory. But I think I'm ok with just 2005 onwards, the rest I can read about.

 

I do wish Moffat would calm down a little bit with the references to old material. A nod here and there is fine, key plot points that are 5 years old... perhaps less so. On the other hand, it is part of the charm when discussing it.

[Abraham_uk]

Well, it wasn't so long ago that it sucked me in. Was randomly channel surfing and stumbled on Journey to the centre of the Tardis (well, Jenna Coleman's legs were what caught the eye first if I'm being honest), stuck around and was utterly sucked in, binge watched the seasons that are on Netflix and bought the rest. I'd avoided it up to that point, basically for the reason you mention: So much backstory. But I think I'm ok with just 2005 onwards, the rest I can read about.

 

I do wish Moffat would calm down a little bit with the references to old material. A nod here and there is fine, key plot points that are 5 years old... perhaps less so. On the other hand, it is part of the charm when discussing it.

 

 

A much need perspective from a late entrant. Thank you so much.

I often exaggerate a problem to provoke discussion. Your contribution has been helpful though.

Jenna Coleman is pretty cute. She has that lovely perplexed look on her face every time something strange happens on that show (which is all the time because this is Dr Who we're talking about).

 

I think when someone takes over from Moffat they might tone down on the references. Though I must say I have this sort of love hate relationship with Moffat. I love his episodes and I love his ideas. He really does go wild and crazy. Less convolution would be an improvement. Though as you say the references do provide some reward to long term viewers who enjoy discussing and speculating about the show.

[Gtdef]

I think the show needs to be watched from the first season of the reboot at the very least. I started watching when it was well underway it's sixth season, without previous knowledge. The way I perceive it, it's more about consequences, morality and a man's journey to find his place in the world and less about the science. Not knowing who the man is, what he is capable of and who his enemies are takes way too much out of the experience. 

 

Also I noticed that since Matt took over, the writing changed. It focused more on the little things, like speeches and the feelings of the characters, than visiting locations and connecting dots leading up to the season finale. Which is all the more reason to start from the first season. You get a better idea of the expanded universe and the identity of the protagonist watching the first 5 seasons. The main antagonists themselves at face value aren't that impressive and at first glance they make the show look something made for children.

[TheClonesLegacy]

Listen was an ok episode. But it doesn't stick with its most interesting idea.

 

The last person alive in the universe being tormented nightly by an unknown being. Could make for a really interesting episode, hell it could be an interesting psychological horror movie.

There's not alot to take away from this episode, other than Moffats apparent obsession with having Clara present in every major event in The Doctors life.

It's filler, unfortunately. Because I really wanted to like this one.

Could've been another Midnight on our hands.

 

Also, what's with people constantly bringing up Pink was a soldier and shock, may have killed some people?

It seems rather seems pretty rude since he seems uncomfortable when it's brought up. It makes Clara come off as very insensitive.

Do people really act like this? Because it feels really unnatural and contrived.

[BadgerladDK]

I think the show needs to be watched from the first season of the reboot at the very least. I started watching when it was well underway it's sixth season, without previous knowledge. The way I perceive it, it's more about consequences, morality and a man's journey to find his place in the world and less about the science. Not knowing who the man is, what he is capable of and who his enemies are takes way too much out of the experience. 

 

 

 

Absolutely agree. I left it out of my timeline above, but the first thing I did after stumbling on Journey to the centre of the Tardis was google "Doctor who where to start", consensus seemed to be to go back to the start of the 2005 run and then take it from there. I'm glad I did.

[Dr.Fumbles]

As others have said, if you start at the reboot in 2005, you should be good. As for explaining River Song to people who don't know who she is, umm a time a traveler that goes in reverse direction to the doctors time-line who ends up in the end to be an echo.

[Dovahzeymahlkey]

Moffat is setting up something big here, and hes probably going to figure out how to kill Rory again to boot. I get the feeling Clara Oswald will out-live Dr. NG+ 1st.

 

EDIT: as in she'll be around long after Capaldi is done his run.

[BadgerladDK]

Kinda get the feeling Moffat is *always* setting up something big, question is more if he'll actually deliver it.