• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Doctor Who
How far back did Clara go?
<<
<
2 of 2
>>
>
sandydune
18-06-2014
Originally Posted by sebbie3000:
“We have the original Clara as a companion. He isn't waiting for any Clara anymore, anyway, as the GI has been defeated. That was the whole reason for her splitting herself up in his timeline.

Of course, they could revisit it, but it seems highly unlikely.”

Maybe The Doctor could be waiting for a phonecall from Clara.
sebbie3000
18-06-2014
Originally Posted by sandydune:
“Maybe The Doctor could be waiting for a phonecall from Clara.”

You mean those he's already had? One of which is possibly a spoiler for the next series?
GDK
18-06-2014
Originally Posted by MinkytheDog:
“You are mistaken - go back and watch the scene where Clara is talking about what it's like to have entered the Doctor's timestream - she says that she has lived many lives, been born, lived and died - and whilst saying that we are shown her VICTORIAN mother AND a younger version of Clara staring out of a window - also in Victorian costume.”

I like the idea that there's no "original" Clara, however I disagree:

If you accept that history was changed (first by the GI and then by Clara's splinters) it follows logically that the splinters did not exist until Clara prime entered the Doctor's timestream. Therefore she is the first and original Clara. The only Clara to enter the timestream (and emerge from it). That act created the other Clara's.

The scene you mention doesn't really support your belief either: Firstly, she says that only after she's entered the Doctor's timestream (couldn't have said it before because it hadn't happened yet) and secondly, the overlayed images are just a TV "flashback" convention.
johnnysaucepn
18-06-2014
Originally Posted by claire2281:
“It isn't just applicable to sci-fi though. It's a basic of writing in general and Moffat's big weakness. He loves the big ideas but he's not a fan of the personal consequences and I can see why to some this means his writing and characters lack depth.”

I disagree that that's the case. What I will concede to, is that there's rarely scope to consider both in one story. When Moffat makes big abstract sweeps, you're right, there's little time spent on the smaller details - but equally when he wants to, he can focus in tightly. Compare the spectacle and tension of The Pandorica Opens with the much more personal and relationship-focussed follow-up of The Big Bang.

Or A Christmas Carol, in which the time-travelling framing device only serves as set-up for the examination of what turns a man into a monster.

It's not that Moffat is averse to doing it, but he doesn't compromise on it, something I feel hamstrings some other writer's potential.
Thamwet
18-06-2014
She was a member of that tribe of cavemen the Doctor met on his first ever (television) adventure. He never noticed her, but she was there. She wore a single piece of animal skin, which was much, much to small for her, and other than that, she was totally naked.

That's what I like to think, anyway.
MinkytheDog
18-06-2014
Originally Posted by GDK:
“I like the idea that there's no "original" Clara, however I disagree:.”

???

Who said there's "no original Clara"?????

I have no idea where you pulled that from?
GDK
18-06-2014
Originally Posted by MinkytheDog:
“???

Who said there's "no original Clara"?????

I have no idea where you pulled that from?”

OK. Sorry. I seem to have misunderstood you when you were debating saladfingers in post #20. It looked like you were arguing that all Clara's were the same and there was no original Clara.

My bad!

Rereading it, I'm not sure where I got that from either! It made sense at the time.
MinkytheDog
19-06-2014
Originally Posted by GDK:
“OK. Sorry. I seem to have misunderstood you when you were debating saladfingers in post #20. It looked like you were arguing that all Clara's were the same and there was no original Clara.

My bad!

Rereading it, I'm not sure where I got that from either! It made sense at the time. ”

Or maybe it was there until Clara came along and....
sandydune
20-06-2014
Originally Posted by sebbie30001:
“You mean those he's already had? One of which is possibly a spoiler for the next series?”

The Doctor likes a chat on the Tardis phone, so it's a possibly possible?
<<
<
2 of 2
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map