Series 6 Inconsistencies
Davidus
Posts: 201 Forum Member
✭
I have to admit that, for me, there was one major glaring inconsistency (among many that occurred throughout the last series) which has niggled away at me.
It might not be much in the scheme of things but I’ll make it known here in case no one else spotted (which I would be surprised if it hasn’t already been noted).
In ‘The Time of Angels’ (Series 5) we are shown, near the beginning of the episode, the Doctor and Amy at the museum where the Doctor states to Amy, that the museum was the last known resting place of the religious order, The Silence.
However, in series 6 ‘The Wedding of River Song’, we see the Doctor ask both the Tesalecta who exactly the Silence are.
Is this a case of plain forgetfulness, bad continuity, or poor script writing. And don’t go saying that in the rebooted universe, this knowledge is erased from the Doctor’s mind, because that just won’t wash.
AND (oh yes, another one’s come to mind, getting on a roll here).
Regarding River Song. In ‘The Impossible Astronaut’ we see her tell Rory that when she first meets the Doctor, she is amazed to meet a man who knows all about her, and she knows nothing about him.....BUT.....in ‘Let’s Kill Hitler’ when she first meets the Doctor (in River’s timeline) guess what??? She knows about him (the fact that he exists, his name and so forth), and he obviously doesn’t know everything about her as he didn’t recognise Mels for being her.
Ok, this maybe can be explained away that when River spoke to Rory she didn’t literally mean everything she said (and yes, she lies – but to her Dad, well ok – it’s possible).
One more thing. This River meeting the Doctor business in reverse order. If this was strictly true, then they would never be able to discuss their shared experiences as it would have never had been able to have any – plain impossible.
So, somewhere along the line, the meetings between the Doctor and River, in opposite directions, (whilst a very good idea), has been disregarded in favour of plots and a good yarn.
This leads me to think that Moffet (genius in stand-alone episodes) cannot handle the loose ends that his ideas tends to bring about and either simply ignores them (thinking the viewer will just accepts what they see, or just don’t care) or disregards them altogether.
This never was intended to be a bash at Moffet (as I do personally think his episodes in the Tennant era were the best) but I’ve now come to think that as showrunner, he would be better to hand over the reins to somebody more capable, and concentrate on what he is good at......writing fantastic single episode stories.
It might not be much in the scheme of things but I’ll make it known here in case no one else spotted (which I would be surprised if it hasn’t already been noted).
In ‘The Time of Angels’ (Series 5) we are shown, near the beginning of the episode, the Doctor and Amy at the museum where the Doctor states to Amy, that the museum was the last known resting place of the religious order, The Silence.
However, in series 6 ‘The Wedding of River Song’, we see the Doctor ask both the Tesalecta who exactly the Silence are.
Is this a case of plain forgetfulness, bad continuity, or poor script writing. And don’t go saying that in the rebooted universe, this knowledge is erased from the Doctor’s mind, because that just won’t wash.
AND (oh yes, another one’s come to mind, getting on a roll here).
Regarding River Song. In ‘The Impossible Astronaut’ we see her tell Rory that when she first meets the Doctor, she is amazed to meet a man who knows all about her, and she knows nothing about him.....BUT.....in ‘Let’s Kill Hitler’ when she first meets the Doctor (in River’s timeline) guess what??? She knows about him (the fact that he exists, his name and so forth), and he obviously doesn’t know everything about her as he didn’t recognise Mels for being her.
Ok, this maybe can be explained away that when River spoke to Rory she didn’t literally mean everything she said (and yes, she lies – but to her Dad, well ok – it’s possible).
One more thing. This River meeting the Doctor business in reverse order. If this was strictly true, then they would never be able to discuss their shared experiences as it would have never had been able to have any – plain impossible.
So, somewhere along the line, the meetings between the Doctor and River, in opposite directions, (whilst a very good idea), has been disregarded in favour of plots and a good yarn.
This leads me to think that Moffet (genius in stand-alone episodes) cannot handle the loose ends that his ideas tends to bring about and either simply ignores them (thinking the viewer will just accepts what they see, or just don’t care) or disregards them altogether.
This never was intended to be a bash at Moffet (as I do personally think his episodes in the Tennant era were the best) but I’ve now come to think that as showrunner, he would be better to hand over the reins to somebody more capable, and concentrate on what he is good at......writing fantastic single episode stories.
0
Comments
*Which of course turned out to be on the asteroid previously known as Demons Run.
As to River, for all we know the Doctor may well meet a version younger than Mels. Afterall Mels has to get from New York in 1970 to Ledworth in the 1990's without seemingly aging too much (Time travel being one way of doing this.)
Moffat decided to use The Headless Monks in A Good Man Goes To War, because their was curiosity over who they were after their mention in The Time of Angels.
A simple mistake (stage exit left me thinks) lol
See I saw that as her referring to once she regenerated into "River" - the point where she said "Who's River Song?". He knew her character and future quite deeply, whilst she new very little about him in comparison. She could hardly have said to Rory "when this regeneration first met..." without giving away spoilers
OP = EPIC FAIL
River said that The Doctor knew all about her when they first met, and he sort of did as he knew about her ways and about her future name, and he was able to convince her to go against her training and not kill the Doctor. She obviously knew who he was and what she had to do to him, but she wouldn't know much else, and even then she couldn't give away that she was Rory's daughter or that it was her in the space suit.
I think they meet very loosely in reverse order. Not exactly.
Not really, because she was upset when she found out that the first time she and the Doctor had kissed was at the end of Day of the Moon, suggesting that she believed because it was his first time, it was her last.
And apparently, there isn't much of a story arc in Series 7 so, he'll be back to writing individual episodes.
We all forget our Who facts from time to time :-)
I'm not even looking forward to the next series in as much as I used to do! I'll give it another try anyway - but hope that they send it BACK to how it used to be!
Moffat has already said fairly directly that he will not be having a prominent series arc next series, so you may be in luck. I prefer the lighter touch to these things too.
How it used to be? For me it is, that is its now how it was for 26 years as opposed to how it was during series 1-4.
Why on earth would you want a show with a central premise of continual change to go backwards? It is doing perfectly well as it is, with some cosmetic similarities to most of the previous series`, because Moff is a fan. To go back to anything that has been before and to dwell there would kill Doctor Who by stagnating it. Also, how would the new fans become new fans if it stays hermetically sealed in it`s own past? Do you want to drive it off the screens?
Anyway...
The `Headless Monks` bit has been explained, but as for the River and Doc meeting order - it has never been a strict reverse order since River was introduced. It is just much much simpler to say that than to fully explain the minutiae of their actual order of meeting. There are plenty of things that aren`t fully explained, as it takes time out of the 45 minutes they have to develop a full story. And anyone can see what is actually happening, so they probably feel that there is no need to further explain it. And neither do I, for one.
You do realise most of what the OP claimed has already been proven to be incorrect right?
And i think it's fairly unlikely that any show runner "paints themselves in to a corner" being as they are the one that controls the lay of out of the rooms being painted, as it were.
People used to say it about RTD and it made about as much sense then as it does now.
To be fair to Face of Jack his comment only appeared to be referring to the heavy use of a series arc that centred around the Doctor and companions. In the past these things have tended to be done with a lighter touch. eg "lets get Barbara and Ian home", "The Doctor is restricted to Earth", "Each standalone story ends with a bit of the key turning up". Even Turlough was (to my admittedly wonky memory) not as over bearing as series 6 arc.
I am enjoying Moff's version of Who. Right from "can I have an apple" something just felt "right" about much of it. It somehow feels more "connected" to the classic series than series 1 to 4. It's extremely subjective and impossible to justify.
However, some things are irritating - the arc. The Doctor is sometimes a little too whacky. Plot resolutions a bit sentimental rather than scifi. The Doctor sometimes too much of a bystander (eg Christmas one). Again, purely subjective opinion.
I like how both RTD and Moff have both continued the classic show and kept innovating, even if not all innovations are to my taste. This, after all, is exactly how the classic show operated and therefore nothing new.
*cough cough* Lost! *cough cough*
Considering the OP already admitted to their mistake, combined with the sheer juvenility of your post, the fail is all yours, my friend.
The worst thing he's ever done is make 'Mels' Amy and Rory's friend growing up. What the hell was all that about???? If Moffat thinks he's been clever in doing that then NOPE. Maybe if we had seen Mels at the start of series 5 and it was later revealed as a twist, but he introduced her and revealed her at the same time, thus we don't care. Also, it's just uneccesarily twisty-turny.
I think the problem with the river song arc is it was all rushed and packed into series 6. It was originally meant to be spread out further but fears that Alex Kingston would not be available meant that they needed to get the story told.
Also for those struggling to understnad River's timeline - go and watch the final episode of confidential. There is a 5 minute clip in that which tells River's story in chronological order (from her eyes)
I would also point out that I do agree that the character of "Mels" was a disappointment. they Should have introduced her early on like in TEH (even if only briefly). That would have made a bigger impact to the audience IMO
I don't see why this needs to have been a problem. If River could regenerate, then they could have had different actresses playing her - she could have gone on meeting future Doctors forever!
In fact, I thought that that's what she was going to do, given that she had pictures of several Doctors. I'm a bit disappointed that she only apparently meets 11. (And 10 once).
According to rumours River will not be departing with Amy and Rory. River is basically the New Jack and will still be popping up from time to time even after Amy and Rory leave.
There is no evidence to suggest that River only met the Tenth Doctor once. She could have met him off screen a few times before he regenerated.
This is highly unlikely though...