Because the Doctor was never frightened of them. I'd say The Doctor was desperate to avoid having to dish out his punishments hence the urgency. He was desperate to be kind. I don't think he'd have done it if Donna was companion at the time, having The Doctor around was always good for him. After all, it was Donna who saved The Doctor from drowning in the Thames barrier.

They addressed that in the script, whether you consider it a convincing explanation is another matter! The claim is that the Doctor hid for their benefit- that they had such a short lifespan that the Doctor just needed to wait them out and no-one else needed to get hurt. But since they refused to give up and made others suffer, he punished them.

Thanks, yes I do remember all that being said at the time, and I do accept it to some extent.
At the start the Doctor looked bloody scared to me though!
If the "Family of Blood" had such short lifespans anyway (if they couldn't get their mitts on a Time Lord) why all that retribution at the end? They would have died soon presumably anyway, so why the vindictiveness? The first signs of the "Time Lord Victorious" attitude perhaps....?

No, because the "Time Lord Victorious" was an ego trip, whereas he probably saw the punishments of the Family as his personal responsibility. Let's face it, not only is the Doctor extremely clever but he is very powerful and now that the Time Lords have gone, the highest authority around, certainly higher than humans. The Shadow Proclamation might have something say about that but still

Anyway what really struck me about the punishments is that they were delivered because of the damage they did to the village, brining war a year in advance. They did damage to the Earth, and he was bringing the Family the punishment he felt they deserved. In a way, he gave the family exactly what they wanted. Letting them live forever.

I really lovedit, my favourite of the Martha era. I wasn't quite convinced about the end bit as well, but I never let something like this get into the way of a good and enjoyable story. I would give it 10/10 and I can watch it again and again.

All true, but it's a bit inconsistent. I think this is probably the only time the Doctor has ever been shown to deliberately and calculatingly punish defeated enemies like that after defeating them, as opposed to banishing them or whatever as part of the actual defeating process. Why has he never done it to other enemies who are still around after the event? He probably can't do it to the Master, as he's a fellow Time Lord, but there are plenty of others he could have done it to.

Anyone reckon Paul Cornell might write a few more?

He kept the Carrionites hidden and locked away in the TARDIS cellar. He tricked the Weeping Angels into looking at each other, he blamed human beings when he was infected by the living Sun in 42, he let Cassandra the trampoline dry up and blow up into pieces. He nearly killed the last Dalek in the universe, he nearly walked away from Rose after she saved her Dad. Might not be punishments but he's found all sorts of ways to dispatch his enemies. Any way except using a Gun

I hope so because his scripts are consistantly excellent. Shame he's only written 2 stories for New Who so far.

Still not quite the same thing in my opinion, but I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this!
Anyway, it was still a great story, one of the very best!

To be fair, what he did with the Angels was purely defensive.

Totally agree with the above points and I dont mind the episodes based more towards kids after all its what makes the programme what it is and why I love sitting down and watching it with the kids. As for Smith (Matt) he is the one part I dont have an issue with, I think he is a fantastic Dr but yes I do think he needs to be a little bit older (or grow, like you say) I do wonder what River Song will say after she said Tennant was so young lol. It seems at least to me RTD's era caught it right for me,and I am not too keen on the "fairytale" element Moff is trying to bring in so far, plus he seems to have a checklist of things to do to please old Whovians and is overdoing it on the nod backs to previous DR's. Again I apologise for hijacking the thread however its seem to be the only one where people can discuss the 2 era's without it degenerating into being a Moff hater RTD hater.

Has the chap who wrote these episodes done any other stories?

I thought the lad playing son of mine was very good as well, has he done much since?

Paul Cornell? He wrote Father's Day, back in 2005.

Ah see thanks ting, I thought it was father's day which i also quite liked, even though it was rosecentric it was actually good in spite of her i felt

So did I. Though I didn't really have a problem with Rose anyway, until her second series. It all went downhill for me from there.

Thanks, he has a decent line up of episodes then.

I'm not dissing your opinion in anyway here, but what is it about Rose in season 2 you didn't like? I personally didn't see too much difference in her characterisation between the two seasons. Was it that you thought she acted differently between the two Doctors? If so, I didn't really notice it....

i wouldn't answer for tingamnetro but for me on Rose she became extremely clingy and jealous and quite annoying in series 2 I thought there was actually a better relationship, or at leats one that had more credibility between her and 9. I mean obviously it was all set up for her pride and fall and also if posts elsewhere are to be believed at the behest of julie Gardner. But none of that really matters for me when it comes to fathers day because it wasn't about the big eyes between the doc and assistant just about the story, oh and time travel, and consequences of actions in changing events, i found it a more superiro story than the ones taht focussed more fully on the Doc rose relatiosnhip becasue the relationship was incidental to teh plot not what drove it and this also worked for me in Human Nature, tho I do accept taht she does the whole 'fall in lve and not with m' bit but then again Martha was sort of always wrotten to be 10s unrequited admireer and a rebound thing whereas initially Rose wasnt, anyway thats my tuppence worth, Im sure Ting and otehrs will argue it all far more eloquently.

I think that was Harry Lloyd? He recently had a run in The Little Dog Laughed at the Garrick alongside Gemma Arterton, Rupert Friend and Tamzin Greig. Great reviews too.

Not sure what he's been doing on television, if anything.

Yes it turned out to be great. I remember reading the synopsis prior to the series launch and wincing. The idea that the Doc isn't the Doc at all for two episodes filled me with dread. But it was hugely enjoyable and I have to say the actor who played the lad that got attacked first by the family of blood (was his name Baynes or something) would make a brilliant 'Master' .. he's got that look about him and also had great presence

It occurred to me that River Song said to David Tennant's doctor in that library episode, "You're younger than I've ever seen you", when in fact, in her timeline she would have met Matt Smith's doctor first.
( I bet next episode he will know her when he sees her but she won't know him ).

Hmm, I guess Matt Smith hadn't been cast yet. Ok so he's not as pretty but he does look a fair bit younger.

I just found the whole relationship between Rose and the tenth Doctor, her clinginess, her jealousy and her sheer smugness annoying. She dominated the stories far too much, too. That isn't the companions job, as far as i'm concerned-it left me with the impression that RTD was far more interested in writing for Rose than in writing Doctor Who.

Or it's possible that the first Doctor she met was a new incarnation but older looking. Still it'll be interesting to see how Moffat handles their next meeting.

I always thought she was judging his age based on something beyond his looks (eg. she could tell his age by the look in his eyes).

Doc 10 had never met River before, so this was the earliest stage in his life when she met him. Hence, he was the youngest she had ever seen him.

I thought this was apparent based on the way the Doctor reacted by saying he was not young. True, he is actually 900 years old. But if River has known him as a 1200 year old, then he would be young by comparison.

Similarly, Matt's Doctor will seem older to her than Tennant's - even if he looks physically younger. It's a sign that she is so aquainted with him that she judges him as a Time Lord might and not as a human would.