Throw away lines that may be important.

1246716

Comments

  • Joe_ZelJoe_Zel Posts: 20,832
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    G_G1 wrote: »
    I doubt it - Moffit hates Captain Jack and Torchwood. The only gay/bi characters Moffit finds acceptable in life are females - hence the over use of the lesbian lizard and her wife. Moffit has done everything he can to kill off Torchwood and Jack, never mentioning them again and as a final "up yours" to the RTD era, has cast a prominent character from BOTH series as the Doctor himself!

    My guess he is hoping that we will all forget about the past and accept his tenure as the ultimate gospel. This is the most "in your face" example of Moffit killing off Torchwood and distancing himself from Captain Jack!

    Well, where do I start?

    Moffat hates Torchwood and Captain Jack? Source? Moffat wrote Jack's debut episodes ("The Empty Child"/"The Doctor Dances") and IIRC wanted him to be included in series 6's "A Good Man Goes to War" but couldn't because of schedule conflicts.

    The only gay/bi characters he finds acceptable are female? Because Jack hasn't appeared and Madame Vastra has? Huge leap of logic there.

    The Paternoster Gang have appeared in about 7 episodes over the last 4 and a half years. Hardly overused. Even then not even as a gang, I think it was only Vastra in the first two of those 7.

    He's done a final "up yours" to the RTD era by casting Peter Capaldi as the Doctor? Yes, he was quite prominent in Torchwood but I wouldn't call his Pompeii character prominent at all.

    Quite a few other actors have appeared in the show as a guest character prior to being cast as another character in a main role.

    Also, it was RTD himself who closed off his whole era as its own story so that Moffat and the new production team could have a fresh start similar to the 2005 revival. He drew the line under it.

    I fail to see how Captain Jack not yet appearing in a Capaldi era episode (of which we are only 2 episodes into) is somehow the most "in your face" example of Moffat distancing from the characters. Should we also take it that he hates Donna? She appeared in the Pompeii episode after all.

    I'm not Moffat's biggest fan to be honest. I love some of his standalone episodes but absolutely hate the majority of his long running story lines and some of his work as show runner but some of the straw clutching about Doctor Who and its writers baffles me more and more.

    However, if your post was some kind of sarcasm or joke then I walk out of this thread with my head in my hands, ashamed of my stupidity. :blush: ;-)
  • MinkytheDogMinkytheDog Posts: 5,658
    Forum Member
    Just saw a BBC trailer for the second episode (nothing at all "spoilery" in it so it's safe to view) - and Capaldi's Doctor is wearing a wristwatch.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdVm2tGuyao
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 33
    Forum Member
    Joe_Zel wrote: »
    Moffat wrote Jack's debut episodes ("The Empty Child"/"The Doctor Dances")

    Agreed, however, the one line that stands out the most from these is when the Doctor looks at Jack and states "you're not normal". Moffat is a word-smith and could have used any number of lines to convey that Jack is immortal and that it's not ok, but this statement is regularly used to degrade gay people in real life, and I am sure that Moffat would know that. Nothing this loaded, or derogatory has every been said about Vastra, so I have to take a leap of logic and make the connection as to why Jack has not appeared, or torchwood ever mentioned. So sure, Moffat may have written Jacks first episodes, but he was not the show runner at the time, he was doing a job he was employed to do, and would have received direction from RTD as to what was going to be in those episodes. The major themes once Moffat took over are deeply saturated with traditional heterosexual ideals: Marriage and having children. The irony of homophobia is that lesbians are accepted as a hetrosexual man's sexual fantasy, while gay men are percieved as a threat. Captain Jack was an already established gay/bi character in the series but was never seen or heard of again, It seems that Vastra is a regular, because she is female and married while Jack is not.IE gay characters can only be accepted if they conform to traditional heterosexual ideals.
    Joe_Zel wrote: »
    The Paternoster Gang have appeared in about 7 episodes over the last 4 and a half years.
    Well that's about more than one episode a year, definitely one too many, and if you look at the number of episodes over that time it’s about 68% of the last 4.5 years have been on this lot.

    Joe_Zel wrote: »
    Yes, he was quite prominent in Torchwood but I wouldn't call his Pompeii character prominent at all.
    Quite a few other actors have appeared in the show as a guest character prior to being cast as another character in a main role. .

    Sure, but this time it is very very different, and it drives me nuts that people are using this to justify the casting of Capaldi. Previous examples are all of completely minor characters that were hardly on screen long enough to have any significant impact. Capaldi was the main family that the Doctor saved in Pompeii - hardly something that can go unnoticed! As for torchwood, how many newbie’s will watch that show and ask why is the Doctor is posing as a civil servant... this is such a strong example of Moffat crapping all over Torchwood. I don't know why people can't see it. In order to accept Capaldi as the Doctor, we have to either: assume that the world of Torchwood never happened, does not exist and has nothing to do with Doctor Who, therefore Captain Jack will never make another appearance on the show; or we have to step out of the doctor who universe and look at every character as just another actor that can play anyone in the show. Let’s just get Donna or Gwen Cooper, to play Riversong, after all River has regenerated before, or better still, let’s get Tom Baker to play the master!

    So when I say "in your face" example, I am talking about the casting of Capaldi as the Doctor. This is a symbolic representation of Moffats attitude towards Torchwood, i.e. it never existed and all the characters are insignificant to the cannon.

    Never before has the audience had to suspend their disbelief so much so, as to dismiss the world of Torchwood as well as episodes from the RTD era in order to accept Capaldi as the Doctor.
  • Virgil TracyVirgil Tracy Posts: 26,805
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    G_G1 wrote: »
    I dunno who this woman is - but she is delightfully insane! No doubt she is part of the "big picture" story line that will only resolve at the end of the series. I like the idea of Miss C and Missy being the same - as for accents, well I am not from your part of the world so I cannot tell the difference between all the different regional accents, but the line she says "I like his new accent, I think I might keep it" stood out a mile! What a strange thing to say! Perhaps the doctor is not the real doctor, but a droid created by Missy and just perhaps.... Missy is in fact the master!

    yeah , me too .

    can't figure that out at all
  • 16caerhos16caerhos Posts: 2,533
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Strax mentioning Clara's life expectancy...
    That won't be the only time it's mentioned in S8. It could mean something given the theme of this series appears to be death and the afterlife.
  • Joe_ZelJoe_Zel Posts: 20,832
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    G_G1 wrote: »
    Agreed, however, the one line that stands out the most from these is when the Doctor looks at Jack and states "you're not normal". Moffat is a word-smith and could have used any number of lines to convey that Jack is immortal and that it's not ok, but this statement is regularly used to degrade gay people in real life, and I am sure that Moffat would know that. Nothing this loaded, or derogatory has every been said about Vastra, so I have to take a leap of logic and make the connection as to why Jack has not appeared, or torchwood ever mentioned. So sure, Moffat may have written Jacks first episodes, but he was not the show runner at the time, he was doing a job he was employed to do, and would have received direction from RTD as to what was going to be in those episodes. The major themes once Moffat took over are deeply saturated with traditional heterosexual ideals: Marriage and having children. The irony of homophobia is that lesbians are accepted as a hetrosexual man's sexual fantasy, while gay men are percieved as a threat. Captain Jack was an already established gay/bi character in the series but was never seen or heard of again, It seems that Vastra is a regular, because she is female and married while Jack is not.IE gay characters can only be accepted if they conform to traditional heterosexual ideals.

    This is the strangest leap of logic I've ever heard. You took one line that refers to his immortality, decide for yourself that it doesn't fit and concluded Moffat is using subtle homophobia? *rolleyes*

    Featuring marriage and having children in the show is not homophobic, it's a natural part of life. As much as people may hate these stories, reproduction is a big/natural part of life. Of course it's featured. Is that homophobic because gay people can't reproduce? No.

    There are plenty straight characters from RTD's era that we haven't seen and a few straight characters introduced in Moffat's era. But you've cherry-picked a couple this warped view that Moffat is somehow a homophobe.
    G_G1 wrote: »
    Well that's about more than one episode a year, definitely one too many, and if you look at the number of episodes over that time it’s about 68% of the last 4.5 years have been on this lot.

    68% of the last 4 and a half years have been spent on the Paternoster Gang? Uh, no, not even close. I think you need to brush up on your maths.

    Cold Blood/The Hungry Earth we are introduced to Vastra.
    A Good Man Goes to War we are introduced to Jenny. Not very much focus on them, the episode has other more prominent story lines to deal with.
    They then appear in The Snowmen and Crimson Horror, the latter of which is a small supporting role.
    They then have cameo appearances at best in The Name of the Doctor, again, the episode's focus is on a few other things.
    Then an appearance in Deep Breath, making perfect narrative sense.

    68% is not even close.
    G_G1 wrote: »
    Sure, but this time it is very very different, and it drives me nuts that people are using this to justify the casting of Capaldi. Previous examples are all of completely minor characters that were hardly on screen long enough to have any significant impact. Capaldi was the main family that the Doctor saved in Pompeii - hardly something that can go unnoticed! As for torchwood, how many newbie’s will watch that show and ask why is the Doctor is posing as a civil servant... this is such a strong example of Moffat crapping all over Torchwood.

    There is no justification needed for Capaldi's casting other than "Is he the right actor to play the role?" and IMO, from what we have seen so far, yes he is going to make an excellent Doctor.

    Nobody said it's going to go unnoticed. But it's not as if Capaldi is appearing all over the place. I'm sure most rational minded people will say "Ooh, look there's Peter Capaldi playing another character" not "Oh, now I'm confused, why is the Doctor pretending to have a family in Pompeii?" You're being petty for the sake of it.
    G_G1 wrote: »
    I don't know why people can't see it. In order to accept Capaldi as the Doctor, we have to either: assume that the world of Torchwood never happened, does not exist and has nothing to do with Doctor Who, therefore Captain Jack will never make another appearance on the show; or we have to step out of the doctor who universe and look at every character as just another actor that can play anyone in the show. Let’s just get Donna or Gwen Cooper, to play Riversong, after all River has regenerated before, or better still, let’s get Tom Baker to play the master!

    That's not even the same thing. Now you're comparing the actor of one main character being recast in someone else's role.

    The Doctor is played by a new actor every few years, that's a fact of the show and nothing unusual. So recasting River Song with the actor who played a main character in the same show is not even in the same vein. Again, you're being petty for the sake of it.
    G_G1 wrote: »
    So when I say "in your face" example, I am talking about the casting of Capaldi as the Doctor. This is a symbolic representation of Moffats attitude towards Torchwood, i.e. it never existed and all the characters are insignificant to the cannon.

    Never before has the audience had to suspend their disbelief so much so, as to dismiss the world of Torchwood as well as episodes from the RTD era in order to accept Capaldi as the Doctor.

    You don't have to suspend any disbelief or treat any characters as insignificant. They are not the same characters. Peter Capaldi is an actor capable of playing more than one.

    You don't have to dismiss Torchwood or RTD's era, you just have to grow up and realise it's a television show with actors. Again, the Pompeii episode is one of hundreds. It's no more significant than any other.

    You really think Capaldi was cast because he appeared in two RTD ran shows? Please.

    You really can't sit and enjoy Doctor Who because you're constantly thinking of his role in Torchwood? Oh dear.

    You seem to be taking square pegs and desperately forcing them through round holes to fit this idea that Moffat is homophobic, obsessed with getting off on lesbians and wants to wipe RTD and his characters off the show's history. Rubbish.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,273
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    G_G1 wrote: »
    Agreed, however, the one line that stands out the most from these is when the Doctor looks at Jack and states "you're not normal". Moffat is a word-smith and could have used any number of lines to convey that Jack is immortal and that it's not ok, but this statement is regularly used to degrade gay people in real life, and I am sure that Moffat would know that. Nothing this loaded, or derogatory has every been said about Vastra, so I have to take a leap of logic and make the connection as to why Jack has not appeared, or torchwood ever mentioned. So sure, Moffat may have written Jacks first episodes, but he was not the show runner at the time, he was doing a job he was employed to do, and would have received direction from RTD as to what was going to be in those episodes. The major themes once Moffat took over are deeply saturated with traditional heterosexual ideals: Marriage and having children. The irony of homophobia is that lesbians are accepted as a hetrosexual man's sexual fantasy, while gay men are percieved as a threat. Captain Jack was an already established gay/bi character in the series but was never seen or heard of again, It seems that Vastra is a regular, because she is female and married while Jack is not.IE gay characters can only be accepted if they conform to traditional heterosexual ideals.

    Ok have to weigh in on this specific point, if memory serves me that line you refer to comes from the third series when Jack jumps onto the Tardis and not the Empty child episodes. If I am right on that then the episode you are refering to was actually written by RTD and not Moffat. So as far as I'm concerned you are jumping to conclusions based on something that never happened - sure the Doctor takes a disliking to Captain Jack but I don't remember him saying "you're not normal" to Jack in either of the Empty child episodes as before that point he was just like any other human. :confused:

    I do agree that the rest of you logic is also thin at best. There is at least 1 previous Doctor who appeared in the show before becoming the Doctor as a minor character, which sets a clear precedent for no need to address such things, and the fact that it is being addressed is in fact partially down to RTD unless I am much mistaking, the explanation that is used came from an idea RTD pitched to Moffat so I hardly see how that is a "two-fingers" up at RTD's era?
  • CorwinCorwin Posts: 16,588
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    G_G1 wrote: »
    In order to accept Capaldi as the Doctor, we have to either: assume that the world of Torchwood never happened, does not exist and has nothing to do with Doctor Who, therefore Captain Jack will never make another appearance on the show; or we have to step out of the doctor who universe and look at every character as just another actor that can play anyone in the show. Let’s just get Donna or Gwen Cooper, to play Riversong, after all River has regenerated before, or better still, let’s get Tom Baker to play the master!

    Actually it's pretty impossible to fit the RTD penned Miracle Day into the Universe of the Parent show so I think RTD has done far more than Moffat to separate the two shows.


    Joe_Zel wrote: »

    Cold Blood/The Hungry Earth we are introduced to Vastra.

    We never met Vastra till A Good Man goes to War. The two Silurians Neve McIntosh played in THE/CB were different characters.
  • Joe_ZelJoe_Zel Posts: 20,832
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Corwin wrote: »
    We never met Vastra till A Good Man goes to War. The two Silurians Neve McIntosh played in THE/CB were different characters.

    Ah, I haven't watched since it aired. So that's more evidence that they're used even less than that.

    Paternoster had had about 4 episodes as a gang and even then two of them were cameos at worst, supporting at best.
  • CorwinCorwin Posts: 16,588
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    So did the 12th Doctor go back in time and tell the 10th Doctor to name a Galaxy after Gretchen Alison?
  • MinkytheDogMinkytheDog Posts: 5,658
    Forum Member
    Corwin wrote: »
    So did the 12th Doctor go back in time and tell the 10th Doctor to name a Galaxy after Gretchen Alison?

    Why would he need to - the 10th Doctor travelled millions of years into the future so the 12th (or is it the 1st?) could have just left a note - as River did when she carved a message into a cliff-face.
  • James FrederickJames Frederick Posts: 53,184
    Forum Member
    I think the fact it was noted that Clara had just met 2 solders with a colour as a surname will be a plot point.

    Maybe Danny is the "dead" brother and the different surname is either explained by the fact that they are not real surnames but more code names depending on what unit they are in or he changed it but picked another colour so it still had a connection to his real name.
  • The Alpha GamerThe Alpha Gamer Posts: 3,122
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Just thought of something else that could be expanded on later - whatever the Doctor was trying to calculate with all that maths and Gallifreyan script in the bedroom - it wasn't connected to anything in that episode (and we would be making an assumption if we say it was just to show him being crazy).

    Pay attention to the scenes onboard the TARDIS in Into The Dalek...



    The one I'm surprised no one has mentioned is last week, the clockwork droid said "where is the other?". It made sense in the ep, yes, but its still interesting for those of us familiar with The Cartmel Masterplan.


    Also as people have said, Strax talking about Clara's life expectancy last week and this week the Doctor is talking about her being old. It might be wishful thinking on my part, but I think we might be close to seeing the last of her :D
  • MinkytheDogMinkytheDog Posts: 5,658
    Forum Member
    I think the fact it was noted that Clara had just met 2 solders with a colour as a surname will be a plot point.

    Maybe Danny is the "dead" brother and the different surname is either explained by the fact that they are not real surnames but more code names depending on what unit they are in or he changed it but picked another colour so it still had a connection to his real name.

    Following your thinking (which is definitely interesting) - do you think he may have "died" and gone to that "heaven" - and then returned to Earth?

    The key there (in respect of the original purpose of this thread) would be that there may be a "theme" building up - the Doctor explained how he was able to grab a person a second before death and the same could apply to Missy and "heaven". And would that potentially tie-in with Pompeii and the Doctor's face.

    Regardless, given Moffat's habit of "borrowing" themes from other shows and movies, could we be getting a "Freejack" story - where saving someone too quickly causes a big problem
  • MinkytheDogMinkytheDog Posts: 5,658
    Forum Member
    New "potential" this week - more chalk-written calculations - this time, inside the Tardis.
    Looks like there may be some unexplained significance to the Doctor's scrawling in Vastra's gaff.
  • CD93CD93 Posts: 13,939
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    CD93 wrote: »
    Anything Roman is worth noting, now.

    Not a line - but there just happened to be a display about (Ancient?) Rome outside of the Coal Hill cupboard.
  • MinkytheDogMinkytheDog Posts: 5,658
    Forum Member
    All the guff about Capaldi resembling a Roman and no-one's pointed out that he's an ITALIAN Scot :)
  • Sufyaan_KaziSufyaan_Kazi Posts: 3,862
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    New "potential" this week - more chalk-written calculations - this time, inside the Tardis.
    Looks like there may be some unexplained significance to the Doctor's scrawling in Vastra's gaff.

    I imagine its related to trying to locate where Gallifrey is ?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 503
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The_Judge_ wrote: »
    I imagine its related to trying to locate where Gallifrey is ?

    This was my thought too.

    I don't think we can ignore the Dalek talking about seeing Silence either. It's Moffat, any time that word is mentioned nowadays it's probably worth thinking about.

    I hope not though, I hope the whole Silence arc is completely finished now.
  • MinkytheDogMinkytheDog Posts: 5,658
    Forum Member
    CamCam wrote: »
    I hope the whole Silence arc is completely finished now.

    I sincerely hope not.

    I don't think we need it being a major plot point this time around but it would be a huge mistake to completely drop something that we have previously been shown is massively significant to the entire galaxy.

    Let's not forget that the Daleks are such a huge favourite because they keep rearing their shiny domes. They have far more presence than the "another week, another alien" types we get (and it's not just DW - everyone remembers Klingons and Romulans precisely because they were a "presence" within that universe).
  • claire2281claire2281 Posts: 17,283
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    'He's a ladykiller' seemed like an underhanded hint this week.
  • sandydunesandydune Posts: 10,986
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    If he turns up in a smart white suit for his date with Clara, that will be a surprise:D
  • James FrederickJames Frederick Posts: 53,184
    Forum Member
    claire2281 wrote: »
    'He's a ladykiller' seemed like an underhanded hint this week.
    Maybe he wasn't crying about something he did but something he has to do
  • MinkytheDogMinkytheDog Posts: 5,658
    Forum Member
    Another interesting element with potential...

    The military were going to kill the Doctor early in today's episode because "he might be a duplicate" - but duplicates didn't form any stated part of the plot.
  • James FrederickJames Frederick Posts: 53,184
    Forum Member
    Following your thinking (which is definitely interesting) - do you think he may have "died" and gone to that "heaven" - and then returned to Earth?

    The key there (in respect of the original purpose of this thread) would be that there may be a "theme" building up - the Doctor explained how he was able to grab a person a second before death and the same could apply to Missy and "heaven". And would that potentially tie-in with Pompeii and the Doctor's face.

    Regardless, given Moffat's habit of "borrowing" themes from other shows and movies, could we be getting a "Freejack" story - where saving someone too quickly causes a big problem

    Unsure really about that but the fact Clara made a joke about meeting two solders with a colour as a surname makes me think they wanted us to notice that
Sign In or Register to comment.