I think this is when he will be told about the passing of Sarah Jane and he will cry briefly
As a nod to Lis Sladen, a touching moment. But surely, for a time-traveller, no-one ever dies? A time-traveller can always visit a friend during his or her lifetime. Does the Doctor mourn for all his UNIT friends every time he lands on Earth later than 2050?
As a nod to Lis Sladen, a touching moment. But surely, for a time-traveller, no-one ever dies? A time-traveller can always visit a friend during his or her lifetime. Does the Doctor mourn for all his UNIT friends every time he lands on Earth later than 2050?
I assumed this would be River Song related, if this episode does tie in to her fate. I'm probably wrong, though.
As for those saying that as he's a time traveller, the death of a loved one shouldn't matter, since when has The Doctor taken death lightly? Yes, they may be alive in the past, but they're still dead. He might be able to travel back and see them, but they can't re-live their lives. Their lives have come to an end, he feels emotion for them, imo.
The team behind SJA - as well as RTD - were adamant that Sarah Jane should live on, and the end of SJA was meant to suggest that. I don't think Moffat would be disrespectful enough to change that ending.
When someone has entered his time line, they are not actually dead to him, despite what Clara said imo.
When he finds out that they die though, it's over as he can no longer enter their time stream, for time wimey reasons.
And just to add to that, a lot of time was spent in The Angels Take Manhattan clarifying that point - if he even hears about the death, it has to happen. It implies that time travellers can create fixed points simply by overhearing/reading things, interestingly enough.
When someone has entered his time line, they are not actually dead to him, despite what Clara said imo.
When he finds out that they die though, it's over as he can no longer enter their time stream, for time wimey reasons.
No, that's not strictly true - he can visit them, but he can't risk changing the events that lead to their death. Like how River kept ending up in the Doctor's past (from her point of view), and had to be careful not to let on anything that would mess up the future she'd already lived through.
The team behind SJA - as well as RTD - were adamant that Sarah Jane should live on, and the end of SJA was meant to suggest that. I don't think Moffat would be disrespectful enough to change that ending.
I would rather they pay tribute to her then them pretending a fictional character is still alive when a majority of the people that watch doctor who don't watch SJA
We don't all watch the trailers. Unless something has happened in an actual episode, it goes in spoiler tags.
Trailers themselves are spoilers.
Trailers are teasers. Anything officially released is a teaser and can be discussed.
If you don't watch them, then it is down to you (collective 'you', not personal) to keep yourself away from forums where discussion of released material is rife, and perfectly legitimate.
We don't all watch the trailers. Unless something has happened in an actual episode, it goes in spoiler tags.
Trailers themselves are spoilers.
I'm sorry but if you're spoiled by a trailer then there's no point coming on a Doctor Who forum where the episode is being discussed. I could understand if it was a genuine spoiler but this isn't huge or anything, just one little clip of the Doctor crying.
I would rather they pay tribute to her then them pretending a fictional character is still alive when a majority of the people that watch doctor who don't watch SJA
That's the whole point, she's fictional. Therefore they can decide she's still alive and she is.
I'm sorry but if you're spoiled by a trailer then there's no point coming on a Doctor Who forum where the episode is being discussed. I could understand if it was a genuine spoiler but this isn't huge or anything, just one little clip of the Doctor crying.
Comments
Since the Doctor is a time traveller the answer is Yes and No.
As a nod to Lis Sladen, a touching moment. But surely, for a time-traveller, no-one ever dies? A time-traveller can always visit a friend during his or her lifetime. Does the Doctor mourn for all his UNIT friends every time he lands on Earth later than 2050?
He got a call to say The Brig died
Although what I'd rather have is find out that Sarah Jane got her hand on a time vortex manipulator and went travelling the stars with K9...
As for those saying that as he's a time traveller, the death of a loved one shouldn't matter, since when has The Doctor taken death lightly? Yes, they may be alive in the past, but they're still dead. He might be able to travel back and see them, but they can't re-live their lives. Their lives have come to an end, he feels emotion for them, imo.
I'm pretty sure this was on one of the trailers.
When he finds out that they die though, it's over as he can no longer enter their time stream, for time wimey reasons.
We don't all watch the trailers. Unless something has happened in an actual episode, it goes in spoiler tags.
Trailers themselves are spoilers.
And just to add to that, a lot of time was spent in The Angels Take Manhattan clarifying that point - if he even hears about the death, it has to happen. It implies that time travellers can create fixed points simply by overhearing/reading things, interestingly enough.
No, that's not strictly true - he can visit them, but he can't risk changing the events that lead to their death. Like how River kept ending up in the Doctor's past (from her point of view), and had to be careful not to let on anything that would mess up the future she'd already lived through.
I would rather they pay tribute to her then them pretending a fictional character is still alive when a majority of the people that watch doctor who don't watch SJA
...The Story Goes On Forever...
Trailers are teasers. Anything officially released is a teaser and can be discussed.
If you don't watch them, then it is down to you (collective 'you', not personal) to keep yourself away from forums where discussion of released material is rife, and perfectly legitimate.
I was reminded of this just the other day.
Trailers are aired on TV, so once officially released, it's a free for all on content and falls out of spoiler purview.
I'm sorry but if you're spoiled by a trailer then there's no point coming on a Doctor Who forum where the episode is being discussed. I could understand if it was a genuine spoiler but this isn't huge or anything, just one little clip of the Doctor crying.
That's the whole point, she's fictional. Therefore they can decide she's still alive and she is.
Haha. This is spot on!
It's not from a trailer, it's from here: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s7/doctor-who/news/a481707/doctor-who-ten-teasers-about-series-finale-the-name-of-the-doctor.html