Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Confused by the new chronology, following 'The Name of the Doctor'?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 22-05-2013, 13:54
Sh'boobie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 995

This chart may help...

http://twitpic.com/cse04s/full

...or inspire you to embark upon a massive Nerd Meltdown.

You decide!
Sh'boobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 22-05-2013, 14:36
lordOfTime
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: County Durham
Posts: 13,551
Bring on the Nerd Meltdown.
lordOfTime is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2013, 15:12
The Alpha Gamer
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,932
Except none of that was proved true in The Name of the Doctor...
The Alpha Gamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2013, 15:31
Sh'boobie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 995
However, it was forcefully suggested, and is by far the most likely - considering standing Whovian canon.
Sh'boobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2013, 17:56
Shoppy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,000
I'm still not buying it.
Shoppy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2013, 18:10
Ethel_Fred
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 26,340
I would have thought any 50th anniversary episode would link back to the beginning of DW. Therefore the stealing of the Tardis sequences (including the one that the beginning of TNOTD) are more significant than just an excuse for splintered Clara to pop up to help.
WHY the Doctor had to steal a Tardis and an obsolete malfunctioning one to boot is going to be the Big Reveal - especially why DW1 would trust Clara in selecting a Tardis
Ethel_Fred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2013, 18:35
grizzlyvamp
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Limbo
Posts: 953
It is too early to accept the chronology yet even if Moffat has "approved" it (I don't know if he has or not but we all know we have to take everything he says Doctor Who related with a pinch of salt which ever way)
grizzlyvamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2013, 19:32
Sh'boobie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 995
This article tends to support this version of the chronology.
Sh'boobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2013, 21:03
Shoppy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,000
This article tends to support this version of the chronology.
That's cobbled together from half a dozen different sources and made to look more substantial than it actually is.
Shoppy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2013, 21:08
TEDR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,185
I'm still not buying it.
I think the dialogue between John Hurt and Matt Smith was intentionally written to evoke the Time War, especially given that Journey to the Centre of the Tardis specifically reminded us of the thing just a few weeks earlier.

Of course, Moffatt's such a tease that deliberately putting the Time War into our minds doesn't mean he intends that to be relevant.
TEDR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-05-2013, 22:30
Sh'boobie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 995
So, now that Stax has confirmed John Hurt definitely is the Ninth incarnation of the Doctor from the Time War - entirely validating this chronology - I guess this means David Tennant (the revised 11th) is gonna bite the big one in the 50th Anniversary Episode.

Done Trenzalore... Now for the fall of the 11th.

*Cue Secondary Nerd Meltdown*
Sh'boobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 06:18
Listentome
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 9,692
So, now that Stax has confirmed John Hurt definitely is the Ninth incarnation of the Doctor from the Time War - entirely validating this chronology - I guess this means David Tennant (the revised 11th) is gonna bite the big one in the 50th Anniversary Episode.

Done Trenzalore... Now for the fall of the 11th.

*Cue Secondary Nerd Meltdown*
Strax has confirmed it?
Listentome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 09:54
Gene the Cow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Walter's lab
Posts: 1,073
He said he is 'an incarnation whose face the Doctor has hidden from us, that has the look of a battle hardened warrior.' Hardly confirming
Gene the Cow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 16:38
Sue_Aitch
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,712
But that's as good as for me.
Sue_Aitch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 20:13
kyllerbuzcut
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,739
How about this one - don't think I've seen this yet. ( I'm not saying this is the most believable theory yet, just one of the many ideas, and I've just thought of it)........

John Hurt is an older version of Matt Smith.
The Matt Smith at the end who picked Clara up is not the 'proper' Matt Smith Doctor.

Clara was given the leaf by the 'proper' doctor just before Matt Smith turns up. She is told to use it to go home. It could be some kind of anchor to the real world or something.... anyway.... a second later after she gets the leaf- Matt Smith is calling for her to turn around and come back to him. This doesn't seem to be a very good thing, as she goes very week as John Hurt then appears, and collapses so Matt has to pick her up.

So what if she was supposed to keep going the way she was to return to the 'real world', or back to Earth, but gets called back into the dreamscape sort of landscape of wherever it is they are ( in the Doctor's head maybe? we've yet to find out where it is they are - I guess it could be a real place somewhere). So perhaps John Hurt's doctor is justifying to himself the taking of Clara ( which he is actually just doing right now as his younger self), not letting her return to the real world, to keep himself sane. He is trapped in his own mind/timestream, and has gone totally bonkers and doesn't even know it. All his previous selves are locked in there with him, and Matt Smith takes Clara for totally selfish reasons, for some company in the madness to help keep him sane amongst it all.

How does that one stand up?

I have to say, even though I've thought of it- it;s probably not even my favourite of the ones I've heard, but I think it is a possibility.
kyllerbuzcut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2013, 20:35
sandydune
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 9,213
When you think about it, it seemed a bit obvious when the Doctor and Clara saw the bigger Tardis, it would attract their attention, so could it be possible that The Doctor and Clara went to the wrong place and behind the bigger Tardis, is where the Doctor's real Tardis and proper timestream are. So near and yet so far.

Maybe the John Hurt Doctor is Mr Clever
sandydune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 02:30
johnnysaucepn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,739
That 'chronology' contains a lot of guesses, both as to upcoming plot points and the mechanics of regeneration.
johnnysaucepn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 13:57
vampirek
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,978
This chart may help...

http://twitpic.com/cse04s/full

...or inspire you to embark upon a massive Nerd Meltdown.

You decide!
It misses The Valeyard so that is incorrect to begin with. Further it does not take into account that nowhere has it ever been mentioned that Tennant played three Doctors, he played the Timelord and the Human both are considered the 10th Doctor. Either way Matt Smith's Doctor is not the 13th.

Likewise the table fails to recognise that River Song gave the Doctor her regenerations so the table mentioning the regenerations is also wrong on that basis.
vampirek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 14:55
Sh'boobie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 995
Nowhere has it ever been mentioned that Tennant played three Doctors, he played the Timelord and the Human both are considered the 10th Doctor. Either way Matt Smith's Doctor is not the 13th.
Ignoring John Hurt's placement altogether for a moment.

David Tennants Doctor (the 10th - as far as we knew at the time) regenerated in 'Journeys End'. FACT. (1st Version)

Thereafter, despite choosing to maintain the face of his 10th incarnation - he was actually the 11th incarnation of the Timelord known as the Doctor. FACT. (2nd Version.)

Coincidentally, this regeneration created the First Human / Timelord known as the Doctor. The first, and only. FACT. (3rd Version.)

David Tennant therefore played three versions of the Doctor. It happened right in front of your eyes.

If peeps want to call them all 10... Good for them! However, it doesn't change the fact, David Tennant played Doctor v10, Doctor v11 and Metacrisis Doctor v1.

Now, throw John Hurt in the mix, just before Ecclestone, and all the Doctor's who came after John Hurt get bumped up a number.

Hurt was 9.
Eccleston was 10.
Tennant was 11.
Then he was 12. (As explained above, but bumped up a number.)
Making Smith, 13.

Moffat always promised 'The Name of The Doctor' would rewrite Who's history. This is how he did it.
Sh'boobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-05-2013, 15:32
Bruce_Huge
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 11
My personal feeling is that I would like it if john hurts character was the first incarnation of the character we know as the doctor, and what he did is something the dr has run from since, so William hartnel's dr is the original Doctor because he was the first to take that name. I'd be a bit disappointed if it was something to do with the Time War because the 10th dr was quite open about what went on there, plus if John hurt is a post 8th incarnation then that doesn't really explain why the dr kept his name secret prior to then.

Well, that's just what I think anyway!
Bruce_Huge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-05-2013, 16:42
Sh'boobie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 995
The 1st through 8th Doctor's never conveyed that they were once warriors. Enter Eccleston, and suddenly - he once was.

The Time War is the only period which fits with existing canon, where John Hurt's existance makes any form of sense.

As for the Doctor being 'open' about the Time War - I don't agree. He's acknowledged it, certainly. His Time locking of the Time Lords was hugely justifiable & in keeping with his Doctorly promise.

Something else went on during the TimeWar which we are due to find out.
Sh'boobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-05-2013, 17:19
grizzlyvamp
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Limbo
Posts: 953
The 1st through 8th Doctor's never conveyed that they were once warriors. Enter Eccleston, and suddenly - he once was.

The Time War is the only period which fits with existing canon, where John Hurt's existance makes any form of sense.

As for the Doctor being 'open' about the Time War - I don't agree. He's acknowledged it, certainly. His Time locking of the Time Lords was hugely justifiable & in keeping with his Doctorly promise.

Something else went on during the TimeWar which we are due to find out.
Not necessarily the Valeyard would fit the warrior criteria as well, and ok other evidence suggests that a Time war Doctor is more likely it doesn't rule out the Valeyard completely and until the 50th episode is released we're not going to know.
grizzlyvamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-05-2013, 17:48
Shrimps
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 239
I'm not yet confused about the chronology following the revelation of the John Hurt Doctor, because we haven't been given enough information and the story hasn't been told. I'm not confused about (hopefully) the contents of the second part of a two part story when I've only seen part one. It's not like the whole &*(^^%$"$^ thing about who blew up the TARDIS, where we were carefully told not enough to be sure, so guaranteeing many snide comments between fans on the internet, all positive they know the 'truth.'

I'm happy to speculate with everyone, obviously. However I'll wait until I've seen the Anniversary Story and know the full picture (or as full as we'll get). Then, if it makes no sense, I'll get confused! Moffat might wrap it all up with a bow. Right now, there's the option of him (Hurt, not Moffat...) being inserted where we never saw a beginning (before One, or One himself) or a regeneration (Nine). The whole Time War necessitating double genocide would make the Time War an easy place to stick a rejected Doctor. I don't think he can be later than Eleven, because Eleven immediately recognised him, unlike Ten during 'The Next Doctor'
Shrimps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-05-2013, 19:15
Tardy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 85
Why do people ( in the article and in the chronology ) still go on about the regeneration limit ? They won't stop after 12 regenerations .. End of story !! Or not as the case may be !!!
Tardy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-05-2013, 20:16
vampirek
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,978
Ignoring John Hurt's placement altogether for a moment.

David Tennants Doctor (the 10th - as far as we knew at the time) regenerated in 'Journeys End'. FACT. (1st Version)

Thereafter, despite choosing to maintain the face of his 10th incarnation - he was actually the 11th incarnation of the Timelord known as the Doctor. FACT. (2nd Version.)

Coincidentally, this regeneration created the First Human / Timelord known as the Doctor. The first, and only. FACT. (3rd Version.)

David Tennant therefore played three versions of the Doctor. It happened right in front of your eyes.

If peeps want to call them all 10... Good for them! However, it doesn't change the fact, David Tennant played Doctor v10, Doctor v11 and Metacrisis Doctor v1.

Now, throw John Hurt in the mix, just before Ecclestone, and all the Doctor's who came after John Hurt get bumped up a number.

Hurt was 9.
Eccleston was 10.
Tennant was 11.
Then he was 12. (As explained above, but bumped up a number.)
Making Smith, 13.

Moffat always promised 'The Name of The Doctor' would rewrite Who's history. This is how he did it.
Its not a fact at all, it has been established Tennant played one timelord, one Doctor. The fact he played the human version of the himself does not count. There are plenty of examples showing that it goes CE - DT -MS, and not CE - DT - DT - MS. Therefore this chronology is wrong on that basis.
vampirek is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 13:15.