I still really think we should have got a special with David Tennant and Alex Kingston in 2009... just so she'd met Ten on screen more than just the once and to round off anything she had said in SitL/FotD that needed rounding off before her return in Series 5, 6 and 7.
My brain desperately want to find an answer I can't think of one now but I really want there to be an answer that fixes it.
There is. River meets 12 or even 13, therefore asking about the Byzantium is her way of checking whether 10 is a later regeneration than 11. If she hadn't met 12, there would be no point in asking about the Byzantium as her entire relationship with the Doctor would have played out with 11 and there would be no doubt in her mind 10 is not a later version.
That's the obvious answer. Except mean people have to keep remembering her comments about how young he looked and her confusion at how early in their relationship it appears to be which is hard to reconcile if she thinks he's 12 or 13.
Ok how about this?
The doctor gives her a funky screwdriver just before she goes to the library. That's what we definitely know.
So how about they have a conversation at that time. He tells her"when you next see me I won't know who you are, but you must act normally. Do whatever you do when we meet up.check the timeliness. Just pick a couple of random ones from your book. I won't know what you are on about anyway."
So that is what she does. Yet she is still surprised by how 'young' he seems to be compared to doctor(S) she knows.
Time travel + memory gaps + offscreen adventures = writer's room for manoeuvre.
What if all the forgetting and memory obsession of SM is leading somewhere?
What if 10 had other adventures with River (earlier in her personal timeline by SitL) (that obviously we've not seen) either later in 10's personal timeline or earlier but he's been memory erased? It's even possible that she's had adventures with still earlier incarnations of the Doctor.
Who wrote the spotters' guide anyway?
That leaves many possible explanations and things that could appear in the 50th with River and earlier Doctors.
Having said all that, I have to agree with Granny's assessment, that SM was probably expecting to write the crash of the Byzantium incident for 10.
It's still possible all this could as yet admit some form explanation that holds together.
Has Alex Kingston denied being asked to be in the 50th yet?
I don't know whether anyone said this yet, I'm jumping in quite late, but SteMo said that the Picnic at Asgard was with 10, not 11. Can't remember where this quote is though.
EDIT: Here we go.
Steven Moffat (in Production Notes): In my head, she did. And yes, Asgard was No. 10. May not have been an adventure, strictly speaking. She probably just ambushed him with a hamper!
How many times could Ten and River Song have met in the year between "Journey's End" and "The End of Time"? Twice? Three times? Half a dozen times?
I think Moffat should have requested that RTD age Ten by fifty years between "Journey's End" and "The End of Time" instead of just one, thus allowing Ten to have significantly more off-screen adventures with River Song.
How many times could Ten and River Song have met in the year between "Journey's End" and "The End of Time"? Twice? Three times? Half a dozen times?
I think Moffat should have requested that RTD age Ten by fifty years between "Journey's End" and "The End of Time" instead of just one, thus allowing Ten to have significantly more off-screen adventures with River Song.
The Doctor lies. Especially about his age! The controversies around that alone is enough to fill a book. I guess we can say that perhaps he was making it up. Like when people say they're still 39 instead of 40. I'm still 900!
How many times could Ten and River Song have met in the year between "Journey's End" and "The End of Time"? Twice? Three times? Half a dozen times?
I think Moffat should have requested that RTD age Ten by fifty years between "Journey's End" and "The End of Time" instead of just one, thus allowing Ten to have significantly more off-screen adventures with River Song.
Like I said if 10's memory (or any other Doctor for that matter) has been erased then he could have had adventures earlier in his personal timeline with River.
Well its pretty certain doc 2 did some special missions for the time lords before regenerating, then had his memory wiped. So why not similar memory wiping of other docs.
He might not have much memory left though at this rate, with all the wipes:)
That's the obvious answer. Except mean people have to keep remembering her comments about how young he looked and her confusion at how early in their relationship it appears to be which is hard to reconcile if she thinks he's 12 or 13.
Well, if she does meet 12 she will probably also be meeting a younger, more clueless 11 in her own timeline and potentially an even more clueless 10, so that would explain why she would be confused. Good enough for me.
Basically, I want to keep seeing Alex Kingston after Matt is gone.
I don't see any continuity error at all. "Early days" simply a younger Doctor than she has ever met. Obviously 10 is younger than 11 (even though he doesn't look like it to a human).
Time travel + memory gaps + offscreen adventures = writer's room for manoeuvre.
What if all the forgetting and memory obsession of SM is leading somewhere?
What if 10 had other adventures with River (earlier in her personal timeline by SitL) (that obviously we've not seen) either later in 10's personal timeline or earlier but he's been memory erased? It's even possible that she's had adventures with still earlier incarnations of the Doctor.
Who wrote the spotters' guide anyway?
That leaves many possible explanations and things that could appear in the 50th with River and earlier Doctors.
Having said all that, I have to agree with Granny's assessment, that SM was probably expecting to write the crash of the Byzantium incident for 10.
It's still possible all this could as yet admit some form explanation that holds together.
Has Alex Kingston denied being asked to be in the 50th yet?
How can this be so, since everyone knew this was Tennant's last season and Moffat wasn't asked to write one of the specials?
I don't see any continuity error at all. "Early days" simply a younger Doctor than she has ever met. Obviously 10 is younger than 11 (even though he doesn't look like it to a human).
The problem is that if she already knows that this Doctor is an incarnation earlier than the 11th, then why does she think he might have already been through the crash of the Byzantium?
I don't think Moffat intended to write the crash for 10 at all - I think it was just a throwaway line, a hint to past adventure, that inspired him later.
Well its pretty certain doc 2 did some special missions for the time lords before regenerating, then had his memory wiped. So why not similar memory wiping of other docs.
He might not have much memory left though at this rate, with all the wipes:)
Possibly, but only one story supports that possibility, "The Two Doctors", and that is more likely down to continuity errors of its own rather than a grand plan for "special missions", so not really a lot to support this theory.
This thread has made me realise one of the reasons why I hate the Moffat era so much. When RTD messed things up, as he did with Series 3's last two episodes and End of Time, it was annoying, but it only affected those particular stories. When Moffat messes things up, it stretches across entire series and beyond. He keeps providing more and more questions but rarely any answers.
This thread has made me realise one of the reasons why I hate the Moffat era so much. When RTD messed things up, as he did with Series 3's last two episodes and End of Time, it was annoying, but it only affected those particular stories. When Moffat messes things up, it stretches across entire series and beyond. He keeps providing more and more questions but rarely any answers.
I would take the opposite tack - recons of throwaway details across seasons bother me much less than in-your-face plotholes and inconsistencies within a single story.
This is a particularly good case - the reference to the crash in the first place wasn't anything more than a throwaway line, only those who have watched the episodes multiple times are likely to be aware that there's any connection at all.
The problem is that if she already knows that this Doctor is an incarnation earlier than the 11th, then why does she think he might have already been through the crash of the Byzantium?
I don't think Moffat intended to write the crash for 10 at all - I think it was just a throwaway line, a hint to past adventure, that inspired him later.
That is probably the most likely explanation, that or there were two crashes of the Byzantium? Maybe there was an adventure with Justinian or Constantine?
I would take the opposite tack - recons of throwaway details across seasons bother me much less than in-your-face plotholes and inconsistencies within a single story.
This is a particularly good case - the reference to the crash in the first place wasn't anything more than a throwaway line, only those who have watched the episodes multiple times are likely to be aware that there's any connection at all.
Maybe this particular case was a throwaway line (or maybe it wasn't), but there have been plenty of massive potholes over Series 5 and 6, and to me it grates when they cover a whole series rather than when they are just confined to one story (which is bad enough in itself but it is easier to ignore a single story than an entire series).
I would take the opposite tack - recons of throwaway details across seasons bother me much less than in-your-face plotholes and inconsistencies within a single story.
This is a particularly good case - the reference to the crash in the first place wasn't anything more than a throwaway line, only those who have watched the episodes multiple times are likely to be aware that there's any connection at all.
I tend to disagree. I think it's clear he had plans for River right from SitL So, I don't think the line was purely throwaway. He might not have had much more than a cool sounding name for an event or story at the time (Crash of the Byzantium), but I think he wanted to write that story at some point.
Just to throw in another thought:
River's "early days" remark could mean she knows of or has met many future Doctors. If there were, let's say 50 or 60 Doctors that River has met, 10 could be considered "early days". I guess that means 11 is early too, though.
How can this be so, since everyone knew this was Tennant's last season and Moffat wasn't asked to write one of the specials?
Tennant didn't officially "resign" till after it was known (maybe not publically) Moffat was taking over and has said that he almost changed his mind and stayed on once he knew.
So when Silence in the Library was written there was still a possibility that Tennant would be the Doctor when Moffat took over.
Possibly, but only one story supports that possibility, "The Two Doctors", and that is more likely down to continuity errors of its own rather than a grand plan for "special missions", so not really a lot to support this theory.
Ahh, what about the war games too? Its not really proof but at the end the time lords sort of take him away and we don't see what happens in between then and John Pertwee appearing. If you accept that the 2 doctors takes place after war games in that period where we don't know what happened then there could have been more stuff happening too. That's just what I was calling 'special missions'
I agree there's now a huge amount of support for the theory but it works nicely in my head so ties up a lot:)
Its not for everyone I guess, but I was just adding to the possibility of memory wipes in there.
_____
For the River continuity errors, they don't have to be errors. If a plausible story fits (there's been a few in this thread)then that's good enough. sometimes you have to do that when something isn't explained fully in the story. If you can come up with something reasonable on your own then its fine. Its the big bad errors that cause problems that get on my nerves:)
Comments
There is. River meets 12 or even 13, therefore asking about the Byzantium is her way of checking whether 10 is a later regeneration than 11. If she hadn't met 12, there would be no point in asking about the Byzantium as her entire relationship with the Doctor would have played out with 11 and there would be no doubt in her mind 10 is not a later version.
The doctor gives her a funky screwdriver just before she goes to the library. That's what we definitely know.
So how about they have a conversation at that time. He tells her"when you next see me I won't know who you are, but you must act normally. Do whatever you do when we meet up.check the timeliness. Just pick a couple of random ones from your book. I won't know what you are on about anyway."
So that is what she does. Yet she is still surprised by how 'young' he seems to be compared to doctor(S) she knows.
What if all the forgetting and memory obsession of SM is leading somewhere?
What if 10 had other adventures with River (earlier in her personal timeline by SitL) (that obviously we've not seen) either later in 10's personal timeline or earlier but he's been memory erased? It's even possible that she's had adventures with still earlier incarnations of the Doctor.
Who wrote the spotters' guide anyway?
That leaves many possible explanations and things that could appear in the 50th with River and earlier Doctors.
Having said all that, I have to agree with Granny's assessment, that SM was probably expecting to write the crash of the Byzantium incident for 10.
It's still possible all this could as yet admit some form explanation that holds together.
Has Alex Kingston denied being asked to be in the 50th yet?
EDIT: Here we go.
I think Moffat should have requested that RTD age Ten by fifty years between "Journey's End" and "The End of Time" instead of just one, thus allowing Ten to have significantly more off-screen adventures with River Song.
she probably has! I'd love it if she is in it and if DT is there with Matt i think Christmas would have come early for me.
Me, too.
The Doctor lies. Especially about his age!
Like I said if 10's memory (or any other Doctor for that matter) has been erased then he could have had adventures earlier in his personal timeline with River.
He might not have much memory left though at this rate, with all the wipes:)
Well, if she does meet 12 she will probably also be meeting a younger, more clueless 11 in her own timeline and potentially an even more clueless 10, so that would explain why she would be confused. Good enough for me.
Basically, I want to keep seeing Alex Kingston after Matt is gone.
How can this be so, since everyone knew this was Tennant's last season and Moffat wasn't asked to write one of the specials?
The problem is that if she already knows that this Doctor is an incarnation earlier than the 11th, then why does she think he might have already been through the crash of the Byzantium?
I don't think Moffat intended to write the crash for 10 at all - I think it was just a throwaway line, a hint to past adventure, that inspired him later.
Possibly, but only one story supports that possibility, "The Two Doctors", and that is more likely down to continuity errors of its own rather than a grand plan for "special missions", so not really a lot to support this theory.
I would take the opposite tack - recons of throwaway details across seasons bother me much less than in-your-face plotholes and inconsistencies within a single story.
This is a particularly good case - the reference to the crash in the first place wasn't anything more than a throwaway line, only those who have watched the episodes multiple times are likely to be aware that there's any connection at all.
That is probably the most likely explanation, that or there were two crashes of the Byzantium? Maybe there was an adventure with Justinian or Constantine?
Maybe this particular case was a throwaway line (or maybe it wasn't), but there have been plenty of massive potholes over Series 5 and 6, and to me it grates when they cover a whole series rather than when they are just confined to one story (which is bad enough in itself but it is easier to ignore a single story than an entire series).
I tend to disagree. I think it's clear he had plans for River right from SitL So, I don't think the line was purely throwaway. He might not have had much more than a cool sounding name for an event or story at the time (Crash of the Byzantium), but I think he wanted to write that story at some point.
Just to throw in another thought:
River's "early days" remark could mean she knows of or has met many future Doctors. If there were, let's say 50 or 60 Doctors that River has met, 10 could be considered "early days". I guess that means 11 is early too, though.
So when Silence in the Library was written there was still a possibility that Tennant would be the Doctor when Moffat took over.
Ahh, what about the war games too? Its not really proof but at the end the time lords sort of take him away and we don't see what happens in between then and John Pertwee appearing. If you accept that the 2 doctors takes place after war games in that period where we don't know what happened then there could have been more stuff happening too. That's just what I was calling 'special missions'
I agree there's now a huge amount of support for the theory but it works nicely in my head so ties up a lot:)
Its not for everyone I guess, but I was just adding to the possibility of memory wipes in there.
_____
For the River continuity errors, they don't have to be errors. If a plausible story fits (there's been a few in this thread)then that's good enough. sometimes you have to do that when something isn't explained fully in the story. If you can come up with something reasonable on your own then its fine. Its the big bad errors that cause problems that get on my nerves:)