• 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
Listen
<<
<
2 of 2
>>
>
Tom Tit
25-11-2014
Originally Posted by Kapellmeister:
“Because it created a paradox.”


What's wrong with that?

I think that one thing we are learning from quantum physics is that existence is infinitely stranger than we believed. Our old way of thinking, based on the ancient Greeks, is increasingly becoming a little inadequate. The universe does not have to be predicated purely on a linear cause and effect basis. Open your mind a little bit.
Corwin
26-11-2014
Originally Posted by Kapellmeister:
“Because it created a paradox. If the toy soldier was with the Doctor, hundreds of years in the past, then it couldn't have been in the children's home for Clara to give to Rupert.
”

How is it a Paradox?

The Soldier goes from A (Rupert) to B (Orson) to C(Clara) to D(Doctor).


As to why the Doctor didn't recognise it, we've seen the Doctor can barely remember stuff that happened during his 2nd Incarnation (See The Snowmen) chances are he's probably forgotten (if he even kept it) the odd toy he had 400 years even earlier.
johnnysaucepn
26-11-2014
Originally Posted by Kapellmeister:
“Because it created a paradox. If the toy soldier was with the Doctor, hundreds of years in the past, then it couldn't have been in the children's home for Clara to give to Rupert.”

No, it started in the children's home, and ended up on Gallifrey in the past. It's no more a paradox than Clara being in the present, and then travelling to the past - you wouldn't say that it was then impossible for her to exist in the present.

Quote:
“Moreover, why didn't Capaldi recognise the toy when he saw it in Rupert's bedroom if it had been part of his childhood?”

Maybe he did, maybe he kept quiet about it. More likely, he wasn't paying any attention. We don't know if he kept it for long as a child.
GDK
26-11-2014
Originally Posted by Kapellmeister:
“Because it created a paradox. If the toy soldier was with the Doctor, hundreds of years in the past, then it couldn't have been in the children's home for Clara to give to Rupert.

Moreover, why didn't Capaldi recognise the toy when he saw it in Rupert's bedroom if it had been part of his childhood?”

Given that you have time travel, it's perfectly possible for an object to be in two places at once and it doesn't necessarily create a paradox.

We don't know the full lifecycle of the toy soldier, so almost anything could have happened to it off screen to get it from point A to B to C (or even C to A to B ).

As has been noted, the Doctor has exhibited bad memory of events much more recent than those from his childhood.
LivingDestiny
26-11-2014
Originally Posted by Kapellmeister:
“Because it created a paradox. If the toy soldier was with the Doctor, hundreds of years in the past, then it couldn't have been in the children's home for Clara to give to Rupert.

Moreover, why didn't Capaldi recognise the toy when he saw it in Rupert's bedroom if it had been part of his childhood?”

That's not what I got from it.... From the toy soldiers time line it was at the children's home, Danny passed it from generation to generation until it reached Oraon, Orson gave it to Clara who gave it to The Doctor. No paradox involved.

Back to the OP, no explanations are needed at all. Not every story needs everything explained to be complete
sandydune
29-11-2014
The Doctor uses chalk to write on something , why? Why chalk? can be rubbed off, there for a minute, maybe more, still can be wiped. So, what can the Doctor write, that stays longer?
So listen, The Doctor says listen but nobody listens, why? Doctor, who do you think you are? A timelord, yes, must be that, what else?
Ulsterguy
30-11-2014
Originally Posted by LivingDestiny:
“That's not what I got from it.... From the toy soldiers time line it was at the children's home, Danny passed it from generation to generation until it reached Oraon, Orson gave it to Clara who gave it to The Doctor. No paradox involved.

Back to the OP, no explanations are needed at all. Not every story needs everything explained to be complete ”

As I've said before, fandom might like that, but the other 6 million odd viewers may not. Certainly most people who saw 'Listen' had but one thing to say to me - 'The scripts aren't as good anymore.' They also said that about season 8 in general, and I would agree with them, 'Flatline' & 'Mummy' excluded. The same things weren't being said about season 1-7, which is why I noted it.
henry_hope
01-12-2014
Such broad unsubstantiated generalisations. Many really liked Capaldi and series 8, some considered it to contain some of the best writing of Dr Who....on this site as on other sites.

There is never uniformity of opinion about Dr Who, and that is what makes it so great and long lived.What one person likes,another doesnt. Thats the case between episodes of any series.Long live the variety of response! Its much more important than uniformity of opinion.
johnnysaucepn
02-12-2014
Originally Posted by Ulsterguy:
“As I've said before, fandom might like that, but the other 6 million odd viewers may not. Certainly most people who saw 'Listen' had but one thing to say to me - 'The scripts aren't as good anymore.' They also said that about season 8 in general, and I would agree with them, 'Flatline' & 'Mummy' excluded. The same things weren't being said about season 1-7, which is why I noted it.”

Well, that's a new one on me. The vast majority of what I've heard in the wider media has been positive.
PaperSkin
02-12-2014
Originally Posted by Ulsterguy:
“As I've said before, fandom might like that, but the other 6 million odd viewers may not. Certainly most people who saw 'Listen' had but one thing to say to me - 'The scripts aren't as good anymore.' They also said that about season 8 in general, and I would agree with them, 'Flatline' & 'Mummy' excluded. The same things weren't being said about season 1-7, which is why I noted it.”

Really? the same things were said about all of the previous series and will be said about all future ones. There's always a mix of opinions.
adams66
02-12-2014
Originally Posted by Ulsterguy:
“As I've said before, fandom might like that, but the other 6 million odd viewers may not. Certainly most people who saw 'Listen' had but one thing to say to me - 'The scripts aren't as good anymore.' They also said that about season 8 in general, and I would agree with them, 'Flatline' & 'Mummy' excluded. The same things weren't being said about season 1-7, which is why I noted it.”

As long as Doctor Who has been running there have been people who say "the scripts aren't as good anymore". When Patrick Troughton took over there were a lot of people who said he wasn't as good as Hartnell - look at some of the 1966 letters to Radio Times and audience appreciation facts etc.

I joined the Doctor Who Appreciation Society in 1979 and I was stunned by the sheer amount of vitriol and hatred directed at Douglas Adams and Graham Williams. DWAS reviewers slated that 1979 season, frequently saying that, without a shadow of doubt, 'the scripts weren't as good as they used to be'.

Things never change - for every person who likes the new series, there'll be another who hates it. That's fandom. That's life.

What I'm most amazed by in your post is the fact that you claim that 'most people who saw Listen' have actually spoken to you and have said just one thing 'the scripts aren't as good anymore' .
That's astonishing -
a) that you had the time to actually speak to most of the 7.8 million people who watched that episode, and
b) none of those people had the wit to think of anything else to say about it.
Amazing.
<<
<
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