Doctor Who [7]

The more I think about what RTD did to the Time War the more crabbit I am becoming, especially in light of some complaints across the net from those saying Moffat has rewritten the war. Pure hypocracy!
At least in Moffs case what he did preserved what had gone before in the show.

What RTD did in that one line of 10's "Thats how I chose to remember them." Was to say everything you have watched in NuWho about the Time War, everything we have said about it since the start, all four series until this, the last episode of 10's run wasnt actually true.
It was just how the Doctor chose to remember it. (Thats almost as bad as it was all just a dream and has the same effect)
And then RTD replaces his own original impossible heart rending decision with this terrible one about evil Time Lords justifying doing it, the Daleks dont even get a mention any more.  

How on earth rewriting the entire first 4 series of the Time War in this terrible way is not clearly seen as a million times worse and more clumsy than the clever emotional way that Moffat just gave us is frankly beyond me.

Its almost as bad as the Day Of The Doctor Dallas Dream Sequence 50th Anniversary show isnt it. But not quite.

Except Day didnt change any of the previous events at all, it explained them- whereas RTD's change to his original idea is basically exactly the same as saying it was all a dream- as none of what we were prevously told about the war in the preceding 4 series was true.
In Day what we were told (in both RTD versions) is true, and remains true, and nothing changes for 9, 10 or 11.
So I dont see how they are comparable.

The entire storyline of the episode didn’t make any sense. In Asylum of the Daleks, Clara deleted the Doctor from the entire history of the Daleks. This is an episode that Moffat wrote. And yet, in The Day of the Doctor, the Daleks suddenly remember him? You can’t retcon your own retcon Either the Daleks know who the Doctor is or they don’t, you can’t cherrypick when it’s convenient.
But did Moffat forget The End of Time?  when the Master was used as a signal by the Time Lords to bring Gallifrey out of the time lock. the High Council were trying to end time itself to win the Time War. The Doctor had to send Gallifrey back because it would’ve unleashed everything during the Time War - all the Daleks, and every enemy the Time Lords were fighting and he couldn’t allow that.
And even if the Doctor put Gallifrey into stasis, EVERYTHING on the planet was as well, meaning the battle would continue to be fought if he takes the planet out of stasis. What is the explanation for all that. What did Moffat even do in this episode other than  take the story as RTD had already written it and rewrite it to where there’s a slightly different process, with the same end result?  This was just a simple hand-waving and Moffat rewriting what he wants. It cheapens the previous Doctors and their characterisations It cheapens the sacrifices of the Master, Lucy Saxon, Wilf and Donna, and all for what? For Moffat to put another mark in Doctor Who history without actually explaining anything?

In Asylum of the Daleks, Clara deleted the Doctor from the entire history of the Daleks.- Figg

She didn't delete all knowledge of him from throughout time she just wipes their memories and records of him.

They recognise the Doctor in Day because these Daleks are from long before Clara wipes their memories of him. The Daleks in Day are golden Time War era Daleks, like the one in the 9th Doctor story Dalek that is a Time War survivor.

"when the Master was used as a signal by the Time Lords to bring Gallifrey out of the time lock. the High Council were trying to end time itself to win the Time War. "

Day happens alongside those events- the Military commander of the Time Lords comments on the ongoing High Council Plan in the episode.
The High Council are in the Capitol City- the Gallifrey city featured in Day is Arcadia, the second biggest city on Gallifrey, of which 10 said in the RTD era "I was there at the Fall of Arcadia."

All that happens to Gallfirey during End of Time is that it briefly flickers into being close to Earth and then goes back into the Time War. Probably returning a pico-second after it left. Which could easily have happened whilst the Doctors where off elsewhere.
There is no need in Day to show those events- we have already seen them in End of Time.

"meaning the battle would continue to be fought if he takes the planet out of stasis"

Yes, potentially, if the Dalesk found Gallifrey they might try again, and Rassilon should still be in charge- but all thats for the future thats the story and journey the Doctor is on now, but first he has to find Gallifrey before he worries about what to do about it.

"What did Moffat even do in this episode other than  take the story as RTD had already written it and rewrite it to where there’s a slightly different process, with the same end result?"

As I explained above RTD himself had already completely rewritten the Time War in End of Time.
What Moffat did was to maintain that but to alter the Doctors part in it. This way the Doctror honours the promise of his name and restores hope, both for Gallifrey and for himself.
Hence all the children you dislike in it- they are symbolic of Gallifreys potential future and therefore hope.

The difference is therefore fundamental, RTD era Who and into Moffat era was a Doctor racked by remorse and guilt, now he is a Doctor driven forward by hope.

That is not at all the same end result.

"It cheapens the sacrifices of the Master, Lucy Saxon, Wilf and Donna, and all for what"

I dont see how. All those things still happened and were still necessary. It doesnt effect them at all. Moffat in fact goes out of his way in Day to ensure it effects none of the previous events- way more than RTD did when he rewrote the Time War in End of Time- that is a much bigger rewrite and wipes out 4 series worth of previous information about the Time War.

As we are talking about Moffat excellence, I just LOVE how he took the most powerful woman in English history Elizabeth 1, and turned her into a Busty Ren-Fayre Floozy desperate to get in the Doctors pants. That was a masterstroke. My compliments to the chef.

 

That started with RTD- there are several jokes and references in the 10 era about him and Queen Elizabeth, including a nod wink adult one about her status as the Virgin Queen and in the end of time he says he married her but that "it was a mistake"- which is what we saw in Day- he only proposed because he thought she was a Zygon.
And she also kills a Zygon single-handed with a dagger, pretends to be the Zygon Commander and convinces the other Zygons she is, and gets 10's TARDIS for him. Starts the collection that is in the Under Gallery and sends a message to the future Doctor and appoints the Baker version her Curator.
Id say that was more than just some floozie  

Her sole purpose in the plot was to be a big boobed wench gagging for it. oh yes, like Nefertiti. odd that their main interest is shagging the Doctor.


btw.  Even if the Doctor forgot everything, the consequences would ripple through their time line and 9 and Tennant would have different stories. And Smith wouldn't exist because, if the The End of Time didn't happen , (if Gallifrey is saved) then the Doctor didn't get stuck in the glass room and get the radiation and thus didn't regenerate. So basically it screws everything up big style.

Her sole purpose in the plot was to be a big boobed wench gagging for it- Mrs Figg

Given in the RTD era it was established 10 had married her it is necessary to show why, she is hardly going to have married him if she didnt fancy him.
And this is what we see, but 10 only marries her by mistake.
The only scene in which she is 'gaggin for it' is the opening picnic scene- and why shouldnt she be if she fancies him? Or are women not allowed to be gagging for it?
After that she fights and defeats the zygon commander, not even just a normal one, but the commander, using only a dagger. She assumes the Commanders role for a substantial period of time, arranges to have the TARDIS brought to the Doctors, and does all the other things I listed.
You cant just base your entire round up of her character on one scene at the start and ignore everything else she does in the episode.

"Even if the Doctor forgot everything, the consequences would ripple through their time line and 9 and Tennant would have different stories."

Why would they? The episode clearly establishes that everyone thinks the Time Lords and Daleks destroyed each other- War Doctor becomes 9who only remembers he used the Moment and now everyone is gone.
Everything stays the same- as I noted above Moffat is very careful to maintain that.

Even if the Doctor forgot everything, the consequences would ripple through their time line and 9 and Tennant would have different stories.

I thought about that very thing whilst watching the 50th...It always seemed to me that the Doctor seemed to remember everything no matter how he messed with his own timeline or the very fabric of time and space. There were times when he played at it, "Oh, I don't remember", but even when forced into having no recollection of something, he still retained it - it didn't matter that he had forgotten. A few trips backwards and forwards in time, or a regeneration brought back the lost memories.

What one has to remember is the The Doctor is not in any place at any one time - he is actually in many places (and times). While his body might be here with us, his mind could be far, far off...in the future past. (AH! I've just lifted a line from LEXX.)
He is not a solid, linear tine type person. He is everywhere, all the time.
Understand?

You could also look as it as the story of 9 and 10 we have seen is the story that happens because of Day- by showing War Doctor those particular futures it creates those futures:

War Doctor- "she didn't just show me any future she showed me exactly the future I needed to see."

Moment/Rose- "Now you're getting it."


So there lives wont change because those future versions with those lives are the version he needed to see, and those versions are a consequence of what happens in Day. And we've been watching them since War Doctor regened into 9. Which in turn is a consequence of interacting with that particular future, a future 9 goes on to set in place. I love Time Travel

Missed this one-

if the The End of Time didn't happen , (if Gallifrey is saved) then the Doctor didn't get stuck in the glass room and get the radiation and thus didn't regenerate. So basically it screws everything up big style.- Mrs Figg

The events of End of Time still happen, are in fact happening on the same day.
The Military reference the High Council plan in Day of the Doctor. Thats the plan involving the Master, the White Pointed Star, the drum beats ect. Nothing has changed regards it.

10 doesnt know Gallifrey is saved- no one does except 11 from the point in his timeline of Day onwards.
Everything that has gone before is preserved exactly as it was- it doesn't alter or undermine any of it, not one line.

sorry but I cant help it.

''Or are women not allowed to be gagging for it?'' Petty

that is the singular most idiotic, crass, disingenuous, thing you have said in the two years I have been posting here. and thats in comparison with lots of other jems.

really? gagging for it on Who? a family programme?
I cant even.....

srsly though you just said that to piss me off didnt you.. and surprise! it worked.. that makes ME the idiot.  

really? gagging for it on Who? a family programme?

Why not? (And its your phrase-not mine!) Rose clearly was with 10, and Captain Jack ("It says here you are 'free and available'"), and that wee bloke in the Dalek episode, ect, ect. In fact the only person she didnt seem to fancy or come onto was her actual  boyfriend Mickey!
And Amy is clearly up for it with 11 after her near death experience (much to his dawning horror)

Given the flirtatious nature of Rose in particular I dont see why showing Queen Elizabeth flirting with him right before she is going to marry him, is any  better or worse. Would be a bit weird if she wasnt flirtatious with him when she wanted to marry him. Her actions are in line with the story being told- why 10 married Elizabeth the 1st- I would think a prerequisite to that happening would be her fancying him- and that was more than heavily implied it was the case throughout the 10 RTD era. Indeed in the RTD era the hints we got about Queen Elizabeth were nearly all of the nudge wink-wink variety of British seaside postcard humour- Moffat simply followed through on that set up in the picnic scene.

Seems like a double standard to me. Its all right if its Rose doing it but not anyone else Its ok if RTD wrote it, but not if its Moffat

You can barely move for sexual implications in RTD era Who-

Queen Elizabeth 1. who DIDNT marry, but strangely Moffat thinks that she couldnt possibly have been the most powerful woman in English history without a husband, so he gives her one, in every sense of the word. nice!
first scene. We are looking down the cleavage of a large boobed wench, who proceeds to try to mount the Doctor, begging for a rodgering. very subtle.
compare that to the unspoken and off camera romantic relationship between Rose and the Doctor. Its subtle, never in your face, and most importantly Rose is not sexed up showing her tits, she has dignity, she NEVER simpers or crawls all over him like a rash, and because she is her own person, and doesnt need saving every five minutes, is self assured and NEVER needy, some men find that threatening, its a turn off, they like their women faintly silly needy and crying out ''ooh Doctor save me! (Inhaler girl, who presumably is a member of UNIT and shouldnt NEED saving) because it makes them feel big (Moffat). So even the most important and strong women in history are reduced to big boobs, and over sexed floozys out to bed anything in pants.
great role models of girls. well done.

who DIDNT marry, but strangely Moffat thinks that she couldnt possibly have been the most powerful woman in English history without a husband, so he gives her one- Mrs Figg

That 10 married ELizabeth the First was established by RTD in the Shakespeare Code and in End of Time. Moffat did not do this- RTD did. RTD married her off.
WHat Moffat did was to pick a refrence that came up throughout the RTD era about 10 and Elizabeth being married and let the fans actually finally get to see what happened.
I thought that was a clever thing to do connecting up the two eras through one person, Elizabeth.

"We are looking down the cleavage of a large boobed wench, who proceeds to try to mount the Doctor, begging for a rodgering."

We get to have a good long look down Billie Pipers in the episode with stretchy skin woman, she even feels herself up runnig her hands down the side of her breasts and over her hips in that episode. Why is that not worse?

"Its subtle, never in your face"

See above example. And what is 'subtle' about her revealing to Jack that she is "free and available, no very available" whilst drooling all over him?

"Inhaler girl, who presumably is a member of UNIT and shouldnt NEED saving)"

Um are you sure you watched the episode?- she doesn't need or get saved, she trips up the Zygon that has stood on her 4th Doctor scarf and escapes, she then goes on to free Kate, the Head of UNIT and to face down the Zygons with Kate and to take part in the negotiations with the Zygons. At no point does she get rescued by anyone, she in fact does the rescuing. She is also the one who works out what the stone dust was first and where the Zygons are hiding.
So I am puzzled by why you think she needs rescuing.
In what way does her having an inhaler come into this and mean she needs saving? The point of her having an inhaler was so at the end the viewer could see that they knew who was who, as there was two of her, but only one inhaler- and that despite the fact those two knew they both pretended not to so there would be peace instead of war.
She does brilliantly in fact.
She is an example of the Companion in miniature- she begins by being afraid, then she hopes the Doctor will save her, then she stands up for herself and realises her own potential and then she rescues everyone else and takes part in saving the world.

"So even the most important and strong women in history are reduced to big boobs, and over sexed floozys out to bed anything in pants."

Again you are judging the character on one scene, in which she is with the man she thinks she is about to marry, being flirtatious.
You completely ignore that she escapes herself, kills the Zygon commander by herself with just a knife, imitates the Zygon commander and convinces the other Zygons of this, helps the Doctors escape, arranges for 10's TARDIS to be delivered, sends a message to a future version of the Doctor, hires the Curator and sets up the collection that is in the Under Gallery.
And it all ties her actions into both the future events in the episode and all the references about his marriage to her from RTD era.

Yet from what you say anyone would think all her character did in that episode was try to have sex with the Doctor.

The Elizabeth I part was obviously played up as a bit of light relief. And yes, some of it might have been a bit in bad taste. Though I did feel it to a certain degree was down to the series making a bit of fun of itself and how it portrayed Tennants attractiveness under RTD.

That doesn't mean I disagree with your point about Moffat and women completely, Figg. I agree one can see certain patterns.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:You can barely move for sexual implications in RTD era Who-

And that kind of plays into my point. I think you could say the writers to a certain degree wrote in their own fascinations in the story. So under RTD we get a gregarious homosexual, and under Moffat we get the young feisty women.

oh yes Kate Kate Kate, what does she do exactly, well I will tell you, she is very good at striding down corridors looking in charge and competent. She is very good at explaining things to a bug-eyed Clara, but what does she actually DO?. oh yes the silly woman tries to blow the place up, and is only stopped by the Doctor taking control of her tiny brain and wiping her memory. great. As for Inhaler girl, she wets herself AND runs down corridors, and only accidentally trips up a Zygon with her, ha ha! Tom Baker scarf. oh Doctor save me! she wails and whines. fantastic! as Eccky would say.

Moffat concedes to fan pressure and includes Rose, only it isnt Rose, her character is gone to be replaced by a nebulous conscience, so the only interesting female character is actually not a real woman at all.

The Elizabeth I part was obviously played up as a bit of light relief.- Blue

I thought so, and that is entirely in keeping with the fashion with which it was treated when it came up in the RTD era, which as I noted tended to being a nudge, nudge, wink wink manner



"So under RTD we get a gregarious homosexual"

I would add we also get a flirtatious companion who has a love story with the Doctor and treats her actual boyfriend during her time on the TARDIS with the sort of regard usually given by groups of drunk girls on holiday in Magaluf- what goes on in Magaluf stays in Magaluf.

rather like the woman (AMY) who tries to have actual sex with the Doctor before she is supposed to marry her fiance. She actually propositions him. very Magaluf. she wasnt even drunk.

oh yes the silly woman tries to blow the place up, and is only stopped by the Doctor- Mrs Figg

Kate is in the 50th as a surrogate for her characters father- the Brigadier. Who couldnt be in it because the actor is now sadly dead.
Throughout the Doctors incarnations and encounters with the Brigadier their relationship has been underpinned by one particular conflict- the Brigadier blows stuff up, the Doctor stops him (though not always in time, as in the original Silurian story).
Had the actor who played he Brigadier been alive he would have been in that episode and it would have played out exactly the same way- it was a classic Doctor/Brigadier scene and a nod to fans of the classic and the dear old impulsive military minded Brigadier.

This is shown in the episode itself, when the Zygon says she is bluffing she tells it to look up the Brigadier, she is her fathers daughter, when the Doctor interrupts using a 'space telegram' system he installed when the Brig was still alive he quotes at her something the 3rd Doctor said to the Brigadier in a very similar situation- "Science leads Kate. Is that what you meant? Is that what your father meant?"

So her actions would have been no different had the original male actor played the part, nor would the resolution have been, and we know this because we have seen the Brig and Doctor in similar situations many times in the 3rd Doctor era.
Saying that she acts as she does in the episode because Moffat hates women, thats just beyond me. She acts exactly as her father would have, and I'm pretty sure the Brigadier was a man.

"she wets herself AND runs down corridors"

I dont remember her wetting herself oddly enough, I do remember her working out what had happened to the statues and where the Zygons were hiding, running away, being afraid getting trapped....

"only accidentally trips up a Zygon with her, ha ha! Tom Baker scarf."

....and then quite clearly saving herself by noticing the Zygon on her scarf and deliberately using it to pull the ground out from under the Zygon-

Zygon on scarf-



Her noticing it on the scarf-



Her defying the Zygon having noticed its weakness, that its on her scarf-



Deliberately pulling the scarf up and back to trip the Zygon-



One successfully tripped Zygon-



What exactly is accidental about it hahahah? You appear to be trying to defend your claim the character is somehow sexist by making false claims about what she actually does and belittling her at every turn, so that deliberate actions she performs out of bravery you are laughing off scornfully as accidents.

She then goes onto make her escape, rescue all her friends, face down the zygons and negotiate a peace treaty.

You do seem to have a very selective memory about what the female characters do in this episode.

I was wondering how long it would take for you to bring Amy into a conversation about an episode she is not even mentioned in.

No Amy wasnt drunk, she had just been absolutely terrified however and had thought she was going die.
And unlike 10 at least 11 has the decency to not even realise what is going on, and then to be horrified when he does and  make sure she works things out with Rory.
It takes time for her, life does, but she realises over time who she really wants to be with for the rest of her life and cements that with her final actions in the show.

"only it isnt Rose, her character is gone to be replaced by a nebulous conscience, so the only interesting female character is actually not a real woman at all."

Moffat has said in a recent interview he couldnt bring Rose back as Rose as he felt her story had a beautiful ending and he didnt to want to mess with that. However he did want to honour the character and her importance to the show when it relaunched by having Billie in the 50th.- I will try to find the exact quote.

It seems a good compromise to me. And if he had brought her back there would a lot of extra stuff needed between her and 10, not mention needing to explaining how she got out of the parallel world she is trapped in, explaining where the other human Doctor is. He did the best thing he could, he honoured the character by including Billie Piper. And 10 in Day is clearly from later in his time line- somewhere about the specials, when he is travelling alone (and as he looks more like he did in his last years than in his younger looking first) and it seems to be close to the events of the End of Time, where he tells the Ood that marrying Queen Elizabeth the First had been a mistake, implying it was a fairly fresh memory. So Rose was already long gone.

I'm enjoying this discussion, while keeping some of my internal filters up against spoilers.  I figure that in viewing Who, it's really not a problem to know little bits and pieces of the future and the past of a story, or to recognize characters out of their timelines.  All the same, I'd appreciate the occasional spoiler on the big stuff if you happen to remember. Thanks.

Now on the discussion/debate of women in Moffat: I think it's a very worthwhile and interesting discussion. The women, the playing against gender rolls, the power of love, and the power of memory are all points that come around and around again in series 5-7, often jarringly enough that it took me out of the flow of the story. Whether this is an intentional agenda or not doesn't really interest me. The fact that not only I noticed it, but that so many other people here noticed it in some form or other makes it hard to deny. I haven't seen enough older Who to compare.

I don't know what particularly you're trying to disprove, Petty, or if you're just enjoying a good tussle with Mrs Figg. I think when people are giving you examples of what they see, it's with the hope that you may begin to understand their point, even if you don't agree with it.

It really serves no purpose to try to shoot the examples down 1 at a time, because the overarching pattern is still there.  If for example I said that some of the storylines were too rushed for me to follow on a first time through and I gave examples, a detailed explanation from somebody who understood them might be interesting but it wouldn't change the fact that they still seemed rushed. Does that make sense?

The reason I am shooting them down David is that they are being presented as a defence of a case that Moffat is sexist- they are given as examples and evidence of his sexism. And they are inaccurate factually.
No one watching that episode could seriously say that the use of the scarf was accidental save to try to score a cheap point in a debate by implying the character is helpless when in fact she is pro-active..

Of course I haven't seen the scene and so I haven't read your detailed rebuttal. But I thought the original point was simply that the writers used the 4th Doctor's iconic scarf to save the day symbolically, which makes the person seem almost more like an agent of the action rather than the prime motivator. That at least seems like a valid point of view from up here in the peanut gallery.

{{ }}