Doctor Who: The Day of the Doctor. BBC1. 23/11/2013 19:50. Official Thread

saladfingers81saladfingers81 Posts: 11,301
Forum Member
✭✭
The 23rd of November 2013.

The moment is almost upon us.

The day approaches.

Fifty glorious years leading to this.

The Day of the Doctor.

What did you think of the episode? 874 votes

Excellent
62% 546 votes
Good
22% 193 votes
Average
8% 77 votes
Bad
2% 23 votes
Poor
4% 35 votes
«13456761

Comments

  • Muttley76Muttley76 Posts: 97,888
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Tomorrow is……

    *dramatic drum roll*

    The Day of the Doctor
  • November_RainNovember_Rain Posts: 9,145
    Forum Member
    I'm so excited, and I just can't hide it.
  • LightAtTheEndLightAtTheEnd Posts: 59
    Forum Member
    Better get to bed. Then it will only be one more sleep! :D
  • Ben_FreemanBen_Freeman Posts: 326
    Forum Member
    Off to cinema to watch this is there any news of anything extra at the cinema screening
  • TheSilentFezTheSilentFez Posts: 11,103
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I was just about to make this thread, but apparently I've been beaten to it. :D
    Anyway, I'll post this stuff:

    Trailers:
    BBC 1 Trailer
    Extended Trailer
    "50 Year" Trailer

    Clips:
    A Selection of short clips

    Mini-episodes
    Night of the Doctor
    The Last Day

    (Got my Jelly Babies and Fez at the ready. Can't wait! :D)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,035
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I'm so excited! Have the house to myself to watch it in peace. Pizza in the freezer, wine in the fridge and the dog will have a massive walk late afternoon so she'll sleep through it. Heaven!
  • The GathererThe Gatherer Posts: 2,723
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The 23rd of November 2013.

    The moment is almost upon us.

    The day approaches.

    Fifty glorious years leading to this.

    The Day of the Doctor.

    1990-95, 1997-2004?? (And I would personally add 1986-1987, 2009-2013 (so far) to that list but this isn't the place to go over those arguments again! :D )
  • RickyBarbyRickyBarby Posts: 5,902
    Forum Member
    If you got work tomorrow and want it off give them this:D
  • SladenSladen Posts: 258
    Forum Member
    1990-95, 1997-2004?? (And I would personally add 1986-1987, 2009-2013 (so far) to that list but this isn't the place to go over those arguments again! :D )

    And I'm not counting any time my TV was turned off, or anything that aired before I was born, either!

    And you can't make me! Hummppphhh (grabbing suit jacket with both hands)
  • Will2911Will2911 Posts: 464
    Forum Member
    1990-95, 1997-2004?? (And I would personally add 1986-1987, 2009-2013 (so far) to that list but this isn't the place to go over those arguments again! :D )

    Lol, stop being such a pedant and enjoy yourself. Quibbling over dates is nonsense, it's 50 years since the first episode aired... That should be enough
  • Digital SidDigital Sid Posts: 39,870
    Forum Member
    1990-95, 1997-2004??

    The show didn't cease to exist during these periods, it was just off air. By that logic, last year wasn't the 50th anniversary of the Bond films, as films were only released 23 of those years, or the 125th anniversary of Sherlock Holmes, as Arthur Conan Doyle stopped writing them in 1927.
  • Will2911Will2911 Posts: 464
    Forum Member
    The show didn't cease to exist during these periods, it was just off air.

    Well not true, it was actually on air between 2009-13...
  • Digital SidDigital Sid Posts: 39,870
    Forum Member
    Will2911 wrote: »
    Well not true, it was actually on air between 2009-13...

    I was referring to the bit outside the bracket.
  • Will2911Will2911 Posts: 464
    Forum Member
    Maybe what we should do is this: Add up all the lengths of the episodes and see precisely how much footage of Doctor Who has actually been on the Telly. Then however long the total length of every episode combined is can be the number anniversary this is.
  • TheSilentFezTheSilentFez Posts: 11,103
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Will2911 wrote: »
    Well not true, it was actually on air between 2009-13...

    I think he was trying to imply that he doesn't believe Doctor Who from 2009 to the present day can be counted for whatever reason...which is a totally ridiculous notion.
  • Will2911Will2911 Posts: 464
    Forum Member
    I think he was trying to imply that he doesn't believe Doctor Who from 2009 to the present day can be counted for whatever reason...which is a totally ridiculous notion.

    I know what he was trying to imply. I just didn't wish to acknowledge it
  • DiscoPDiscoP Posts: 5,920
    Forum Member
    I think he was trying to imply that he doesn't believe Doctor Who from 2009 to the present day can be counted for whatever reason...which is a totally ridiculous notion.

    I assume it's because The Gatherer doesn't like it much from 2009 onwards.

    If that's how we're rolling then I'd personally like to jettison the Hinchcliffe era.
  • Will2911Will2911 Posts: 464
    Forum Member
    DiscoP wrote: »
    I assume it's because The Gatherer doesn't like it much from 2009 onwards.

    If that's how we're rolling then I'd personally like to jettison the Hinchcliffe era.

    If we're not counting the bits we don't like then I have a few years I think should be ditched too...
  • The GathererThe Gatherer Posts: 2,723
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The show didn't cease to exist during these periods, it was just off air. By that logic, last year wasn't the 50th anniversary of the Bond films, as films were only released 23 of those years, or the 125th anniversary of Sherlock Holmes, as Arthur Conan Doyle stopped writing them in 1927.

    You've misunderstood my point. The original post said 50 "glorious" years. My response was that the years when the show was off air were not "glorious". I am not disputing that tomorrow is the 50th anniversary.
  • The GathererThe Gatherer Posts: 2,723
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think he was trying to imply that he doesn't believe Doctor Who from 2009 to the present day can be counted for whatever reason...which is a totally ridiculous notion.

    Another misunderstanding. How difficult is it to read a post and the response to it?
  • The GathererThe Gatherer Posts: 2,723
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Will2911 wrote: »
    I know what he was trying to imply. I just didn't wish to acknowledge it

    You obviously didn't.
  • TheSilentFezTheSilentFez Posts: 11,103
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Another misunderstanding. How difficult is it to read a post and the response to it?

    Well if everyone else seems to have misunderstood then perhaps you should have put more thought into what you were writing.
  • The GathererThe Gatherer Posts: 2,723
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Well if everyone else seems to have misunderstood then perhaps you should have put more thought into what you were writing.

    Seems pretty clear to me. Just re-read post 8.
  • DiscoPDiscoP Posts: 5,920
    Forum Member
    Another misunderstanding. How difficult is it to read a post and the response to it?

    There is a school of thought that if ever there is a miscommunication then it is the fault of the person communicating the message rather than those who are receiving it.
  • Will2911Will2911 Posts: 464
    Forum Member
    You obviously didn't.

    I did, don't tell me what I understand and don't understand...
Sign In or Register to comment.