OMG Larkin that proves it!! This is IN FACT, 100% without shadow of a doubt, MENTAL!!! Lol good work, glad you spotted that hidden message there from RTD haha
I just love all the little details that RTD scatters throughout the series.
I hope that Donna really is Ramona. I think it would be such great fun to have her back. A reminder for everyone - Lalla Ward's husband did have a cameo in last week's episode. But I'm sure his appearance on the show has nothing to do with anything that RTD has planned. Nothing at all what so ever. A pure coincidence.
Haha i kno!! (How much humble pie am i gna have to eat if it turns out that The Doctor finds out Donna is Romana from the names of his companions lmao) as much as i cant see it happening, i think itd actually be quite funny after all this haha
Hmm so if the three companions have letters that make Romana then that MUST mean that they are all going to MERGE and become romana. I bet they each have a tiny bit of a fob watch concealed somewhere (probably in donna big ring) and that is going to be the big reveal of 2008.
Everyone i have figured it out. This is exactly what is going to happen. You are all wrong and i am right!
*puts fingers in ear*
LALALALALA Im not listening
I must go and start a new thread about my 100% correct theory right now
Hmm so if the three companions have letters that make Romana then that MUST mean that they are all going to MERGE and become romana. I bet they each have a tiny bit of a fob watch concealed somewhere (probably in donna big ring) and that is going to be the big reveal of 2008.
Everyone i have figured it out. This is exactly what is going to happen. You are all wrong and i am right!
*puts fingers in ear*
LALALALALA Im not listening
I must go and start a new thread about my 100% correct theory right now
:rolleyes:
Either that or Martha Rose an The Doctor are gna have a threesome an the love child is gna be named HECTOR!!!
Mmm. I've been reading these threads on Donna for a while now and never really felt the need to post.
But it occurred to me the other day that there are a lot of "coincidences" around the doctors children in this series. Certainly there is a very strong theme of family going through the whole series which doesn't appear to be a coincidence.
1. The Doctors Daughter herself from well The Doctors Daughter
2. 2 children of previous actors of the Dr have had roles in this series
3. On the space facebook you had Torchwood and their little family (ok that is a bit of a stretch), SJS and her son, Martha and her mother(why was Francene brought back?), and leaving Harriet Jones aside, the only others were the Doctor and Donna.
4. Rose and Jackie are back next week
Maybe its the Doctors real daughter, or maybe i've been on the metal polish again .
Sorry if something like this has alredy been posted I couldn't bear to go through all of those other threads, although I did have a go at it.
Am I the only one who thinks that Romana, while a valued part of Dr Who history, is nothing special in dramatic terms? It would certainly be an anti-climax for me and totally incomprehensible to the new fans whose experience of the Doctor starts with Ecclestone.
what i find depressing about all these threads is how backward looking and necrophilliac they all seem to be.
why this obsession with constant links between old characters and new? yeah, those of us who watched old who love the sly references but isnt it time for some new myths?some new legends?
for kids (and many new to dr who) the rani, romana, etc etc dont mean shit. for them its all about Rose and Donna and the things we;ve been introduced to since new who started,
why does it in any way improve the character of say Donna if it turns out shes just the host or latest incarnation of some tired old character who was never of much consequence in the first place. to me this just devalues Donnas character. I love Donna, for the character she is, and i would feel cheated to have that ruined by some cheap ploy to reference the past.
the occasional bit of self referencing can be a joy when done wisely and smartly. Constant self cannibalising of DW's past would not be good, just downright lazy. and for that reason (and the faith i have in rtd) i dont think any of these theories are right,
lets leave the past where it belongs and start enjoying the brilliance of new who and all thats to come in the next era.
Am I the only one who thinks that Romana, while a valued part of Dr Who history, is nothing special in dramatic terms? It would certainly be an anti-climax for me and totally incomprehensible to the new fans whose experience of the Doctor starts with Ecclestone.
I think the significance is that she is a time lady. RTD had said that she was president of Gallifrey at the start of the Time War. That brings huge significance to someone playing Romana.
what i find depressing about all these threads is how backward looking and necrophilliac they all seem to be.
why this obsession with constant links between old characters and new? yeah, those of us who watched old who love the sly references but isnt it time for some new myths?some new legends?
for kids (and many new to dr who) the rani, romana, etc etc dont mean shit. for them its all about Rose and Donna and the things we;ve been introduced to since new who started,
why does it in any way improve the character of say Donna if it turns out shes just the host or latest incarnation of some tired old character who was never of much consequence in the first place. to me this just devalues Donnas character. I love Donna, for the character she is, and i would feel cheated to have that ruined by some cheap ploy to reference the past.
the occasional bit of self referencing can be a joy when done wisely and smartly. Constant self cannibalising of DW's past would not be good, just downright lazy. and for that reason (and the faith i have in rtd) i dont think any of these theories are right,
lets leave the past where it belongs and start enjoying the brilliance of new who and all thats to come in the next era.
Hooray! I agree wholeheartedly with this sentiment.
thats 'cos its full of theories reckoning donna to be a timelord/ dalek/ kitchen sink/ sally sparrow/ masters daughter/ piece of cheese/ shoelace/ banakaffalatta/ the beast/ grand high poobah of the universe/ harriet jones/ red dalek/ popeye in drag/ spanner/ chop suey/ russell t davies or something
Ah well, come 8pm on Saturday we will all know what is so special about Donna - I have put my twopenneth in about this on other threads but I'm just sick of it all now and the bickering it causing
I propose all speculation about Donna stop right here and now! Then after the episode on saturday the person who got it right (if anyone) can start their own thread entitled 'Ha ha! I told you so!'
what i find depressing about all these threads is how backward looking and necrophilliac they all seem to be.
why this obsession with constant links between old characters and new? yeah, those of us who watched old who love the sly references but isnt it time for some new myths?some new legends?
for kids (and many new to dr who) the rani, romana, etc etc dont mean shit. for them its all about Rose and Donna and the things we;ve been introduced to since new who started,
why does it in any way improve the character of say Donna if it turns out shes just the host or latest incarnation of some tired old character who was never of much consequence in the first place. to me this just devalues Donnas character. I love Donna, for the character she is, and i would feel cheated to have that ruined by some cheap ploy to reference the past.
the occasional bit of self referencing can be a joy when done wisely and smartly. Constant self cannibalising of DW's past would not be good, just downright lazy. and for that reason (and the faith i have in rtd) i dont think any of these theories are right,
lets leave the past where it belongs and start enjoying the brilliance of new who and all thats to come in the next era.
"Am I the only one who thinks that Romana, while a valued part of Dr Who history, is nothing special in dramatic terms? It would certainly be an anti-climax for me and totally incomprehensible to the new fans whose experience of the Doctor starts with Ecclestone. "
Wrong. In Whovian canonicity, Romana ended up returning from E-Space and becoming the President of the Council of Time Lords! If SHE comes back...it mean they are ALL back...and the Doctor's "journey" is at an "end"...;)
There have been far too many references to Gallifrey and the Doctor's childhood in the last two series for RTD to leave it UN-exploited for a mega-climax that in effect - Specials aside - is to last for two years.
Don't forget - the REAL thread running through Series Four HASN'T been the Rose mini-cameos...it's been the Doctor's REAL NAME...and only the Time Lords know that, apart from people the Doctor MAY have told...
Donna won't be Ramona, or The Rani as she's not a timelord she's human, she's got a Mum and Dad and GrandDad, but saying that she is something new not sure what though
Donna won't be Ramona, or The Rani as she's not a timelord she's human, she's got a Mum and Dad and GrandDad, but saying that she is something new not sure what though
Donna won't be Ramona, or The Rani as she's not a timelord she's human, she's got a Mum and Dad and GrandDad, but saying that she is something new not sure what though
I'm not sure this has any more relevence than the fact the alien lady at the Shadow Proclaimation hadn't met a human before, therefore Donna is 'something new' to her or certainly hadn't Donna before.
"Donna" also comes from the Gaelic, meaning "Ruler of the World"
This doesn't necessarily mean she is a Time Lady or something to do with the Time Lords.
But it's still very nice to know why they chose her name - clearly she does have a larger part than the one we have seen her play so far, and she is something 'special', whatever that may end up to be.
Comments
What you have sed is what RTD has given us to work with so far!! And the answer iv come up with is................
I HAVENT A CLUE!!! lol
I just love all the little details that RTD scatters throughout the series.
Everyone i have figured it out. This is exactly what is going to happen. You are all wrong and i am right!
*puts fingers in ear*
LALALALALA Im not listening
I must go and start a new thread about my 100% correct theory right now
:rolleyes:
Either that or Martha Rose an The Doctor are gna have a threesome an the love child is gna be named HECTOR!!!
I can't make any conspiracies or "Donna is a time lord" stories out of that, but I bet somebody can.
Go on folks, run with it!
SaraH Jane Smith
CaptaIn Jack Harkness
MarTha
Donna NoblE
It's like playing scrabble lol.
triple word score for that one
But it occurred to me the other day that there are a lot of "coincidences" around the doctors children in this series. Certainly there is a very strong theme of family going through the whole series which doesn't appear to be a coincidence.
1. The Doctors Daughter herself from well The Doctors Daughter
2. 2 children of previous actors of the Dr have had roles in this series
3. On the space facebook you had Torchwood and their little family (ok that is a bit of a stretch), SJS and her son, Martha and her mother(why was Francene brought back?), and leaving Harriet Jones aside, the only others were the Doctor and Donna.
4. Rose and Jackie are back next week
Maybe its the Doctors real daughter, or maybe i've been on the metal polish again
Sorry if something like this has alredy been posted I couldn't bear to go through all of those other threads, although I did have a go at it.
J
why this obsession with constant links between old characters and new? yeah, those of us who watched old who love the sly references but isnt it time for some new myths?some new legends?
for kids (and many new to dr who) the rani, romana, etc etc dont mean shit. for them its all about Rose and Donna and the things we;ve been introduced to since new who started,
why does it in any way improve the character of say Donna if it turns out shes just the host or latest incarnation of some tired old character who was never of much consequence in the first place. to me this just devalues Donnas character. I love Donna, for the character she is, and i would feel cheated to have that ruined by some cheap ploy to reference the past.
the occasional bit of self referencing can be a joy when done wisely and smartly. Constant self cannibalising of DW's past would not be good, just downright lazy. and for that reason (and the faith i have in rtd) i dont think any of these theories are right,
lets leave the past where it belongs and start enjoying the brilliance of new who and all thats to come in the next era.
I think the significance is that she is a time lady. RTD had said that she was president of Gallifrey at the start of the Time War. That brings huge significance to someone playing Romana.
Store Romana Hand
There you have it, Romana is stored in the Hand! :eek:
Not to mention that Romanadvoratrelundar gives us
Donna Avatar Lord re rum
So Donna is obviously an Avatar of a Time Lord, one that has something to do with 3 times Grand National winer Re(d) Rum.
Hooray! I agree wholeheartedly with this sentiment.
I propose all speculation about Donna stop right here and now! Then after the episode on saturday the person who got it right (if anyone) can start their own thread entitled 'Ha ha! I told you so!'
Gotta agree with this!
Wrong. In Whovian canonicity, Romana ended up returning from E-Space and becoming the President of the Council of Time Lords! If SHE comes back...it mean they are ALL back...and the Doctor's "journey" is at an "end"...;)
There have been far too many references to Gallifrey and the Doctor's childhood in the last two series for RTD to leave it UN-exploited for a mega-climax that in effect - Specials aside - is to last for two years.
Don't forget - the REAL thread running through Series Four HASN'T been the Rose mini-cameos...it's been the Doctor's REAL NAME...and only the Time Lords know that, apart from people the Doctor MAY have told...
We don't know if she was adopted.
"Donna" also comes from the Gaelic, meaning "Ruler of the World"
I'm not sure this has any more relevence than the fact the alien lady at the Shadow Proclaimation hadn't met a human before, therefore Donna is 'something new' to her or certainly hadn't Donna before.
This doesn't necessarily mean she is a Time Lady or something to do with the Time Lords.
But it's still very nice to know why they chose her name - clearly she does have a larger part than the one we have seen her play so far, and she is something 'special', whatever that may end up to be.