Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Should the weeping angels return ?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 20-09-2013, 19:23
Sara_Peplow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,058

Next week Sunday 29th September is the 1st anniversary of Amy and Rorys tragic exit in TATM . Should 12 face them in S8 or after ?. Think there is potential for a really scary and dramatic episode . Daleks the doctor has allways hated for taking his planet and first family from him. Angels took the second .Maybe 11 and River smashed the angel in the cemetery to dust with a sledge hammer. Hope they did destroy that thing otherwise it would only have killed again. However it doesn't mean there are not other angels dotted around time and space. Think about it any statue could be a potential angel. So would you like to see them back ?. Clara needs to know what happened to her predecesors and why the tardis can never return to New York.
Sara_Peplow is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 20-09-2013, 19:32
bp2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 938
I was not impressed by The Angels Take Manhatten so unless they can be used to create a good story then no. However I would like to see Capaldi face the Weeping Angels at some point.
bp2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2013, 19:44
lordOfTime
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: County Durham
Posts: 13,578
The Angels will return, of that I've no doubt. But for now probably not much a cameo appearance like in God Complex. What else can be done with them?
lordOfTime is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2013, 19:48
SilenceWillFall
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 966
Personally I think I'm at the point where I feel that I have seen enough of the Weeping Angels for a while now, so i series 8 I'd prefer either new monsters or the return of some other monsters we haven't seen for a while or if a Moffat monster should come back I'd prefer it were Vashta Nerada over the Angels.
SilenceWillFall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2013, 20:17
Sara_Peplow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,058
Vashta nerada could be good. They were responsible for the tragedy in the library. Could have a good mix of old and new monsters for 12 to face. Bet the first episode will be called "clock strikes 12 " or something like that. Moffat seems to like playing with words or expressions.
Sara_Peplow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2013, 20:37
Mrfipp
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 596
I rather like the Weeping Angels, they're my favorite New Who monster, but do think we should retire them for at least a few years. While I love the gimmick behind them, I do think it's a bit limiting in some regards, though I don't doubt that someone could think of something new and interesting to do with them.

So yes, let's leave the Weeping Angels alone for a while, and if they do make a return, let's have someone other than Moffet write a story for them, have them written under a fresh and new perspective.
Mrfipp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2013, 20:41
sandydune
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 9,282
Originally Posted by Sara_Peplow
Clara needs to know what happened to her predecesors and why the tardis can never return to New York.
Maybe The Doctor needs to tell Clara what happened with his companions, did it take place in Clara's future or her past because Clara has travelled in The Doctor's time stream and she might already be aware.
sandydune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2013, 21:02
Antimon_Bush
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 823
Yes, and Silence too. It would be interesting to see them together, looking each other.

I like Moffat's monsters.
Antimon_Bush is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2013, 21:38
SilenceWillFall
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 966
The thing with Moffat's monsters is that he seems to believe that if you are going to bring them back you should develop them. Which of course is true, you can't always have the same thing. But if the development of the Weeping Angels is anything to go on, his idea of the monsters developing seems to be simply to give them more power, make them stronger than ever etc. instead for example giving them backstory or something of that sorts. That's why while I'd quite like to see Vashta Nerada or Silence back, I'm a bit apprehensive about the possibility of their return and what Moffat would do with them.
SilenceWillFall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2013, 21:55
summer_ste
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,728
The weeping Angels were scary in Blink.

In Time of Angels/Flesh and Stone they were made silly. Giving them a voice and SEEING them move took away the very things that made them scary.

A fair bit of their scariness was restored in The Angels Take Manhatten but things like the giant statue of liberty that just stood there with its mouth open and didn't move, even when nobody was looking at it, again took away the scariness.

I think there is room for one more story if they take them right back to their basics.
summer_ste is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2013, 00:33
DavetheScot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,498
The weeping Angels were scary in Blink.

In Time of Angels/Flesh and Stone they were made silly. Giving them a voice and SEEING them move took away the very things that made them scary.

A fair bit of their scariness was restored in The Angels Take Manhatten but things like the giant statue of liberty that just stood there with its mouth open and didn't move, even when nobody was looking at it, again took away the scariness.

I think there is room for one more story if they take them right back to their basics.
I largely agree. Time of Angels/Flesh and Stone mucked about with the concept too much. There were good scenes in it, especially Amy trapped with the screen showing the Angel. But overall, it worked much less well than Blink.

I liked Angels Take Manhattan much better, but, while I can see why Moffat couldn't resist making the Statue of Liberty an Angel, it didn't make any kind of sense.
DavetheScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2013, 13:54
Shawn_Lunn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Scattered
Posts: 5,542
I like them but I'd rather not see them for a while to be honest.
Shawn_Lunn is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2013, 15:12
Fire Host
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 494
I love the Weeping Angels, but yeah, I'd give them a break until Series 9.
Fire Host is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2013, 16:38
prof_travers
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 102
I, too, love the weeping angels; they have super scary faces and the idea of them being statues is great.

But - and it is a big BUT.

The idea of them sending people back in time as a way of killing them doesn't exactly work well on a show where the hero has a time machine. The Doctor can, under normal circumstances, simply retrieve their victims and restore them to their original time. The reason it worked in Blink was because the Doctor and the TARDIS were separated, the reason it worked (ish) in TATM was because New York was "time locked" (Although there are obvious plot holes in that device - why didn't 1930's Amy and Rory simply get the next boat to London for example). Flesh and Stone worked (ish) because they (somehow) lost their power to zap people like Father Octavian back in time.

A mechanism like HADS (used in "Cold War") would not be sufficient since once the Doctor had recovered the TARDIS he could then go about restoring the people the weeping Angels had zapped back in time - in fact the only reasons why the Doctor didn't restore Sally Sparrows friend from 1930's Hull was (a) he didn't know about her and (b) she was apparently happy there.

On a pseudo-scientific note, I would mention that the universe naturally travels forward in time - at a rate of 60seconds per minute. It therefore seems unlikely that sending someone in the opposite direction would release energy. Its much more likely that sending someone back in time would require energy so the Weeping Angels food source looks a little bit like mumbo-jumbo.

Nevertheless they are great monsters !
prof_travers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2013, 17:51
TheSilentFez
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: In the corner of your eye...
Posts: 8,706
Yes, but not for a couple of years and only if Moffat/whoever else is writing the story can do something new with them. I thought The Angels Take Manhattan was a superb episode, but that was more because of the story itself rather than its use of the Angels.

On a pseudo-scientific note, I would mention that the universe naturally travels forward in time - at a rate of 60seconds per minute. It therefore seems unlikely that sending someone in the opposite direction would release energy. Its much more likely that sending someone back in time would require energy so the Weeping Angels food source looks a little bit like mumbo-jumbo.
Perhaps the energy required to send them back in time is made up for by the temporal potential energy released when the person's future is nullified?
A bit like the activation energy of a chemical reaction.
TheSilentFez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2013, 17:58
louise_stokes1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 98
Yes, just not too often. I think as long as they aren't overused in the future, they could well be considered classics alongside the Daleks and Cybermen in another 50 years time.
louise_stokes1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-09-2013, 01:14
DavetheScot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,498
Flesh and Stone worked (ish) because they (somehow) lost their power to zap people like Father Octavian back in time.
I don't think it was ever said that they'd lost that power. It seemed to be that they just chose to do things differently on that occasion.
DavetheScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-09-2013, 02:41
Grisonaut
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 886
I tend to see the Angels as a monster not unlike the Medusa from the Argonauts stories, et al.

You can't look at one, and they can't look at themselves,

They're not that hard to defeat, really, unless you have no clue what they are.

Crikey, just lead them to the nearest shopping mall, where everyone checks their own reflection every 0.8 seconds.

The Angels would be fooked in Essex.
Grisonaut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-09-2013, 03:57
Mrfipp
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 596
I don't think it was ever said that they'd lost that power. It seemed to be that they just chose to do things differently on that occasion.
The way I see it, Weeping Angels just want to kill things, but they can't because they can't feed off the time energy of "the days that could have been", if there are no days to be had. In the Series 5 story, they were being fed by the spaceship's leaking engine, so there was no real reason why they can't just kill everyone.
Mrfipp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-09-2013, 08:51
Sara_Peplow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,058
They can starve and become weak if they don't "feed" for a while. However they don't actually die.
Unless you use something to destroy the stone. Acid, power tools ect . Look forward to hearing about S8. Maybe they will return in 2015 for S9.
Sara_Peplow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-09-2013, 09:30
joe_000
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 310
No. Don't want to see them back. The whole premise of sending people back in time is flawed when logically all the doctor needs to do is use the tardis and go back in time to retrieve them. The pathetic excuses Moffat writes in to deal with this plot hole ie. New York is time locked etc etc is ridiculous and insulting. If we have to buy this excuse the land the tardis 10 miles out of New York and get the ruddy bus into the city and find Amy and Rory!!!!!!
joe_000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-09-2013, 15:25
Sara_Peplow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,058
Would have been nice would also have liked to have seen him at least try to save river from the library.
Sara_Peplow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-09-2013, 16:37
SpringheelJack
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Sauf Lan'den
Posts: 1,240
I prefer to see the Silence/Silents (which ever they officially are) back. They were terrifying in TIA/DOTM - even if Moffat did cheat around their massive powers between episodes - but they were thrown away in TWORS, and where were they in AGMGTW?
SpringheelJack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-09-2013, 17:15
seanyboy180
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 135
I have a feeling we may just find out who and what they are in the day of the doctor..
seanyboy180 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-09-2013, 17:24
GDK
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wigan
Posts: 2,709
On a pseudo-scientific note, I would mention that the universe naturally travels forward in time - at a rate of 60seconds per minute. It therefore seems unlikely that sending someone in the opposite direction would release energy. Its much more likely that sending someone back in time would require energy so the Weeping Angels food source looks a little bit like mumbo-jumbo.
Given that current science can't tell us what time is let alone why we, and everything we're aware of, "travel forward" at (roughly) 1 minute per minute, I don't see how it's possible to say how likely or unlikely such a method of generating energy is.

One theory is that time is a product of our consciousness and is actually an illusion. We only think there's free will because of the illusion of time and our inability to perceive the future.

Added to which the science in Doctor Who (and most other TV SF, to be fair) is fairly dodgy, so it's really set in a fictional, fantasy universe, that only looks similar to our reality.
GDK 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 23:05.