ironically I am using a phone to post this and cant keep up properly!

It is a phone from 2009 and not even an expensive one so be careful to remember that before assuming my phone is a clue to anything.

IN 11th Hour, the only reason Rory says "It's a camera too" is because the doctor (the female doctor in the hospital) says "Why are you giving me your phone?". He's just saying that he's not giving it to her to use the phone - he wants her to look at the photos he has already taken - because at that point, we haven't seen him taking photos and don't know what photo's he's taking about as the doctor is then called away.

It's just there to set-up the scene where he's taking photos of the man with the dog and establish that he has already spotted the other walking coma patients - which he tells the Doctot that he has.

That scene is set entirely in 2008.

Bear in mind that at that point, Rory is trying to convince the lady doctor that the coma patients have been calling for her (they're actually calling for the Doctor) but he doesn't directly mention that he's seen them walking around the village whilst they are still in their hospital beds. The female doctor then tells Rory to take some time off - implying that he's had these concerns and tried to alert people for a while and has been treated as a nutter for doing so.

It was just setting up the village green scene without giving the whole thing away in one hit whilst also showing that Rory may seem like a bit of a wimp but he's actually smart and under-rated by people around him - he was right to question what he saw. That was further established when he (intuitively?) knew that a man with a dog was actually far more important than whatever was happening in the sky.

The scene, incidentally, is at just short of 20 minutes into 11th Hour.

Isn't it being repeated on BBC3 from tomorrow night - Eleventh Hour (7pm) and The Beast Below follows at 8.05pm.

Thank you. BBC3 is friend of the cheap skate

Although I am sure that all the newspaper , model of phone, staircase and date on pass type mystery is of little interest.

I do want to know why the Tardis was in flames though.

They're also showing some (doesn't look like all) of the repeats on BBC HD - starts around midnight tomorrow.

It came on here and posted a ridiculous theory...

Sorry, I though you wondered why the TARDIS was flamed... My mistake!

Exactly - and then people think it's strange that he's not fazed by the TARDIS being bigger on the inside. Rory's often the comic relief because of his insecurity and indecisiveness, but he's no idiot.

We'll see.

Remember SM gave Amy the surname Pond to connect her to River, and we had to wait nearly two years to find that out. The man who told the crew not to dismantle 10's control room because he knew he would need it eighteen months later. (Well, planned to be twelve months anyway)

Give it time....
A turn of phrase that doesn't make any sense. Why is it the village that time forgot? The Doctor didn't forget it, he came back. It appears to be up to date. It has phones, cars, TVs.
That line sticks out like a sore thumb, unless we don't yet know what it means.

It is that, because the Dreamlord used the phrase (well known, oft used phrase) to suggest that the TARDIS and travelling in it is exciting, but the village itself is boring and old-fashioned.

That's all... It needs no further explanation. It makes perfect sense.

If you type "the village that time forgot" into Google - you'll get 14,600,000 hits - only a few of those are anything to do with "Leadworth"

That does make sense. But by the same argument you could have told anyone suggesting that Pond was connected to River that "Pond is a common surname. That's all. No further explanation needed."
In the end it turned out to have a much more significant explanation.

One plausible explanation does not automatically disprove all other possible explanations.

In an interview Alex Kingston said that Karen Gillan knows exactly how she leaves the show and has known that from the very start. Which obviously means that Steven Moffat knows exactly what he plans to do. Which would mean that he would incorporate setup for that into wherever it was needed from the start. So it would be very logical for there to be things in the very first episodes that were there to set up the end.

We have a character calling Ledworth "the village that time forgot" and we have a nametag with a very wrong date on it and you don't see that they could possibly be connected?

I don't see a dream (which is what it turned out to be) character using a well known phrase among other phrases being related to a props error (which it has been officially stated to be), no.

How could they be?

I hardly think that they left 10's control room sitting intact at the studios all that time gathering dust and taking up very expensive floor space.
Surely the scenes set in it in TDW were filmed at one of the exhibitions where it's on display!

No, it has been stated several times that they had left 10's control room standing. Even Neil Gaiman describes it being on the set next to the new one.

And you believe that?

As for the dream character, in any show that uses dream sequences they use that to reference reality, either metaphor, foreshadowing, whatever.

I forgot to mention - it was dismantled, just wasn't packed away. It was kept in much the same way it was before it was a fixed set.

I livef for a while on one of those revolting shoe-box housing estates and someone had graffitied the "Welcome to..." sign - adding "The land that taste forgot".

Ah, fair enough.
I didn't think that they would have left it standing intact and unused for all that time. I know from working in TV that studio space is at a premium, and you pay to rent it by the square foot (or the metric equivalent) so no-one would ever leave something standing there doing nothing for any length of time, certainly not a set that took up so much room! If they kept all the components, as they obviously did, re-erecting it temporarily again wouldn't have been that much of a big deal. They probably didn't even have to do it all that well, as it was pretty low lit for the scene it was used in.

Yes, I do.

And in those instances, the dream will be a clip - not a full episode. It's a segment.

The 'metaphor' in this dream was that the Doctor had some issues with himself. The Dreamlord was trying to be as mean as possible.

All valid points, but the point was the decision was taken to keep the set eighteen months before it was needed, because they knew that far ahead that it would be needed.

From Neil Gaiman's blog:
Q: Why didn't you make it so the old control room we saw was from the 1980s? I was so sure that was what it was going to be.

A: Because I did not have the ability to ask the producers back then to leave their sets up until I needed them. Whereas I did have that ability with the Ninth Doctor's Console Room. I could ask them to keep it for me until we needed it. And they did. They lied to anybody who asked why it hadn't been taken down, and they kept it up.

AFAIK the BBC own the Upper Boat studio and it's used almost solely by DW and its spinnoffs so they wouldn't have had to pay rent to keep it, although clearly they might have wanted to use the space.

We know SM plans things years in advance. It would be incredible and unbelievable if he hadn't put things into the early episodes to set up much later events. Like the Doctor wearing the wrong jacket in Flesh And Stone, put down to a simple continuity error at the time but actually something done to set up the end of the season.

So the Doctor suspects, or even knows, that there is something wrong with the village.
To suggest that a writer would somehow not be allowed to foreshadow events in a dream is crazy. Dreams are used for foreshadowing all the time. Buffy had a whole dream episode that foreshadowed events two and three seasons later.

I didn't say events couldn't be foreshadowed in dreams (and Buffy logic is very different to Who logic), I just said that it's normally segments.

And I just do not understand why a simple phrase that describes exactly what the village was like (we saw that the old lady still had an old style TV, that there was a very sleepy feel to the village, that it was definitely old fashioned - and chosen specifically for those qualities I would wager - in TEH) would stand out? It's a figure of speech!!

Just because you personally haven't heard it before does not make it a foreshadowing. It is a very common figure of speech to describe old-fashioned things, which Leadworth was.

Where is the foreshadowing there?

Yes, but planning something in advance witha clue that hinges on a very well known figure of speech that just so happens to describe the village as it is (or any other village like it)?

I sincerely doubt it...

Who said I hadn't heard that expression before?

Anyway, we'll see....

Like planning something like a character wearing the wrong jacket in a single scene?