My ex is scared of spiders. She once managed to jump from a cross-legged position on the floor up onto the bed without twitching a muscle.

You should thank your lucky stars you weren't around for Jon Pertwee's last story then!

You know even as a fully grown adult occasionally I still get nightmares about giant spiders on your back

Having correctly made the removal fromm the matrix, does it make me some hopeless Who anorak ?



That makes a lot of sense, and I guess in TV world it would be a way to establish the Daleks as the all terrifying monsters to a new generation


Completely agree with you there


That makes a lot of sense to, and what a way to do a role call of soem of the old monsters as a nod to the 'classic' series

Welcome to the club, Mark

Actually, that post took me almost 90 minutes to think through logically and type up in such a way as to be intelligible, so I'm glad it made sense to someone.

The idea for the galactic war came to me when I idly found myself wondering about Babylon 5 yesterday, and the realisation we're all coming to that there is a story arc running throughout the entire series.

The only thing I can't really agree with is the Doctor being forced to regenerate as a punishment. The only ones that could impose that penalty on him would be the Time Lords - but they're all gone. I think his regeneration is down to the injuries he sustained during the war, pure and simple - but I'm happy to be proved wrong if that's the case.

Give over mate!! Why does it matter if it's only a TV show, if something invokes an emotional response you will cry or feel sad regardless of what the stimulus is. I assume that because of your age you are possibly married and have a family, are you going to tell your wife/partner/girlfriend/daughter to grow up when they shed a tear during a film or TV program.

I don't think so, why then feel the need to tell someone on a forum you don't even know to do the same.

Act your age......

The only problem with this, AM, is that RTD has gone on record as saying he wants to show a regeneration sequence as soon as possible, presumably to ignite the interest of the whole new generation watching (and let's face it, the regeneration sequence is always a treat for us fans, regardless of whether 'our' favourite actor has been picked to play the Doctor or not). So I do think Eccleston IS the Doctor.

Although I agree with you that the writers have the power to tell the story as they see fit (with certain provisos of course), I think this would be a step too far and also unnecessarily complicated for the new fans.

You see, some of the best fiction is that which is written simply and not bogged down with cumbersome plots.

(By the way - I'm not trying to p*ss on anyone's parade here, just trying to think it through logically with everyone and hopefully contribute something useful.)

I do agree that the Doctor, probably through his negligence (or more likely a miscalculation) was responsible for the loss of Gallifrey and the Nestene's homeworld - and probably a few more planets besides, we'll have to wait and see.


Very good! I agree 100% with this. Rose is the Doctor's link to us, the audience - a modern day reference point we can all identify with (as was always the "assistant's" role). She will work out the solution just as the majority of the audience does - except, of course, for us smart-arses posting on here, who'll probably have it all down pat by the time the credits roll at the end of episode three.

And this Doctor is quite scatty in some ways - often it is Rose who provides a solution (throwing in the anti-plastic, pointing out the Millenium wheel etc). This is obviously caused by his recent regeneration, as he always took a while to get over the effects. By portraying him as scatty, it nods to the long-term fans, but doesn't bog down the story a-la Castrovalva (how annoying was the time it took Davidson to recover!).

What an ingenious little plot device to keep the audience interested as they 'work it out for themselves' - through Rose's eyes, of course. As human beings, we are always trying to solve puzzles - isn't that exactly what we are doing by posting here on this thread?

(As an aside - in the books, the Doctor has lost most of his memory following the destruction of Gallifrey and is based on early 20th century Earth, where it is said he (and his Tardis) will need almost 100 years to recover from the trauma. Could explain why he appeared in the photos of the family about to board the Titanic etc. Another nod to the books, without bogging down the whole episode in retrospective dialogue).

By the way - excellent discussion thread. It's so nice to have a mature, free-flowing exchange of ideas,rather than just descending into the 'I hated it' type of posts.
Last edited by DenWatts : 07-04-2005 at 12:03

Ah but as the last Timelord maybe he self penalised himself

Over the years I think I have watched far too much Dr Who than is really good for me. You know this when you can start to quote dialogue on the shows on UK Gold

Oh for sure as I said earlier if Ecclestone was to turn out not to be the Dr you could hear the collective switch over of about 6 million TV sets (leaving us anoraks waiting fro the news of cancellation after the 1st episode of the 2nd series).

Also they NEED to do the regeneration to establish that it happens, and it's a great oppertunity fro some impressive effects


I totally agree with you


Indeed


Yep a few more pi**ed off aliens along the way


I wonder if anymore clues will be thrown in when the stories are set in the past, as there would be no obvious outlet for more clues ?

I'm looking forward to the ghost story, the trailer looks very good


Indeed. Anmd the fact that people want to talk about it *and* the show still gets mentioned in the mainstream media kind of shows that maybe it's ressurection is well timed and a success


That's a neat theory. The more you expand on the books the more I want to read them all.


Yes indeed, the first time in months posting in these forums has seemed worthwhile

Yes I know. I wasn't saying that's what I think was going to happen, or wanted to happen. I was just trying to illustrate that the writers can do a lot more than what's immediately obvious to the viewer.
I know that Chris is going to regenerate into David Tennant.
You seem to have misunderstood me.
I was just throwing out a random option, not trying to say that this is necessarily what I wanted to happen.

I wasn't even arguing a point really.
All I was really doing was trying to highlight that nobody needs to worry too much about the writers being limited by rules, and that they can keep the series exciting and unpredictable, and create twists at every turn.
I was only really trying to say that the writers may write things that still keep things fresh and exciting and won't feel too bogged down by restrictions based on the predictability of "rules".

But even in this pretend example, they could still do the regeneration.
It might be the Doctor's body,..but The Master's mind. Or something based around the lines of Superman 3 when Superman was split into two people, then merged together. Or a variation on the regeneration of the fifth Doctor when Tom Baker changed to "The Watcher" who was looming around for a few episodes, before "The Watcher" then changed to Peter Davison. That was breaking Doctor Who convention at the time. that wasn't a classic A - B kind of regeneration, it was more of an A-B-C regeneration.

There's always options that the writers will consider to keep one step ahead of the viewer. If they didn't then they'd risk people getting bored by being predictable.

So don't think I was making a prediction, I was just playing around with random examples to illustrate a point.

I did say that my example was merely a "flight of fantasy". I did say that. Where I was just throwing up an example of how far the writers could stretch something.



I noticed that you said that The Doctor is supposed to have lost his memory after Gallifrey was destroyed.
This is interesting, because that's what I kind of had in mind when I made up that mock example of the Chris Eccleston Character suddenly realising at the end that he isn't the Doctor, and this new David Tennant guy is.
A bit like the storyline with the O'Brien "Imposter" in that Star Trek Deep Space 9 episode from ages ago. It eventually becomes evident right at the end that he isn't who he thinks he was.
(By the way, don't think I'm actually thinking this might happen, I'm not, I'm just trying to illustrate my train of thought in that mock-up example I gave earlier).

But I was also thinking of memory when I said earlier in my real possible scenarios , that the Chris Eccleston Doctor is in denial about this miscalculation or negligent accident on his part that may, or may not have resulted in the death of Gallifrey.
Like I was saying in the post about what I really suspect, I mentioned that every time Rose asks him about himself, he almost resists even thinking about his past, and literally physically recoils from her, and gets angry when she asks probing questions.
Like somebody in denial, who tries to hide away from the truth of a situation, makes excuses, and invents their own version of events.
So possibly there is a mental block here in which The Doctor has convinced himself that he is not to blame, and has tried to create a convenient false memory for himself that makes him feel better.
When in real life somebody has gone through something extremely traumatic, this can actually happen for real, where they literally block out the truth to subconciously hide from it and create a false memory.
It can get to such a point that the person actually starts to believe the version of events that is just the massaged truth, and not the reality.

No - he would need the Matrix for that and it's destroyed.

Well, not even I am that bad

Suppose (just suppose) that the Doctor is looking for some sort of loophole in the Laws of Time in order to put things right.

He uses Earth history (as we know that he has an affinity for our planet) to try and effect small changes - saving just one family from certain death on the Titanic (and then perhaps trying to stop it from sinking altogether); trying to warn the peoples surrounding Krakatoa (sp?); preventing Kennedy's assasination.

He has had some success, but failed on the major timestreams.

He realises that perhaps he needs a "human factor" to help him find an answer. He chooses Rose (for reasons that will become apparent) and introduces her the the bredth & scope of time travel. He knows that at some point she will say "why can't you just go back and..." he will give the textbook answers (Blinovitch limitation effect, first law oftime etc) and Rose will say "But that's stupid when you can just..."

Cue big grin and we're off to put things right!

Of course, there will be repurcussions...

All pure speculation, but that's part of the fun

I think it's easy enough to do as Rose digs deeper into the past. She can simply ask him during a relevent moment in the episode.

Agreed. It's written by Mark Gatiss who also wrote some of the Doctor Who novels (amongst other things) I've been talking about.

I can honestly say that for anyone who has an interest in the DW universe, they are an excellent read. The original scope of the books was to take that universe and expand on it, and push the boundaries further than ever before.

And therein lies the problem of trying to put too much of the books into the new series. Some of them were downright complicated, and could have easily provided an entire story the length of the Troughton adventure, The War Games!

As RTD is such a fan himself, I'm certain he would have read at least some of them, if not all. So I like that he drops little hints in from the books, but doesn''t swamp the new series and new viewers with items from them.

Keeps fans old and new happy by doing it that way.

P.S. In one of the first eighth Doctor books, Benny (Bernice - his assistant at the time) realises that she must now leave the Doctor as he has to go off on his own. So she cheekily beds him, a sort of parting gift for herself.
It's all written in such an understated, tongue-in-cheek way that the author gets away with it quite nicely.
Last edited by DenWatts : 07-04-2005 at 14:21

Good old Pertwee and his Blinovitch limitation effect
In my mind, that's exactly how it will happen - with Rose saying "But that's stupid when you can just...."

And the repercussions, at least the most obvious, will be that he will have to regenerate again. (I get the feeling there will be more later).

I would like the current series to end with the Doctor being dragged off into the Tardis by Rose after being mortally injured (having put Gallifrey right, of course). Nice bit of tension to leave the viewers hanging on with, wondering if he will live or die, and leave them clamouring for more. That way, we can have the regeneration right at the start of the Christmas special (90 minutes please, RTD!) and the new Doctor can show us what he's worth with a nice long story of his own.

Don't worry - I didn't misunderstand you. I knew you were simply saying the writers could do <insert scenario here> if they wished, but that didn't necessarily mean they would, or even that you wanted them to.

And I totally agree that each successive Doctor has brought something new to the role that at first glance would contradict current, 'accepted' lore - but we all came to terms with it, given time. (Although who wouldn't want to kill Peri with her annoying voice )

The ground-breaking one, of course, being the fact that the Doctor could regenerate in the first place. It's the reason we still have the good Doctor around today, and is still an absolute masterstroke on the part of the writer even after all these years.

So no, I wasn't criticising you in any way. I was simply trying to rationally balance any suggestions (including my own) against a few (essential I think) criteria:

1. The 'accepted' tv lore - which everyone who is a fan and admirer of the original 'DW' will know.

2. The novelisations which continued the Doctor's adventures after McCoy left our screens - the majority of the 'tv audience' will not know anything about these, although the hardcore fans will have read at least some, if not all.

3. Balancing the new programme for a whole new audience, when that targetted audience is in as wide an age group as possible.

Of the three criteria, number two is, I think, the most difficult to judge. The novellisations were meant to carry on the Doctor's adventures after he left the screen, as I've already said. These were never officially 'endorsed' so to speak, but Virgin books (the original publisher) did have the blessing of the BBC to continue writing DW adventures and use the DW universe.

So hardcore fans will have followed them and will already know that Gallifrey was destroyed (and indeed ceased to ever exist in our timeline), the Doctor was removed from the matrix, hence how he can be the only surviving Timelord and the circumstances (in the book, civil war) that caused that terrible outcome.

The problem is, the "tv-only" fans won't know any of this.

A further problem is that the die-hard fans who have read the books will then say that unless the books are followed to the letter that the series is 'rubbish' and doesn't follow the 'existing' lore.

(But the books were never canon).

To complicate things a little more, this series is designed to capture the imagination of a whole new generation, who don't even know the Doctor can regenerate yet.

So what's the solution? Do your own thing!

Stick pretty much with the accepted 'tv' lore (unless it gets in your way - if it does, invent something!), throw in a few acknowledgements to the books (the continuing adventures) that the die-hard fans can pick up on (and they will, believe me, e.g. Clive's photographs possibly) and then write stories that a whole new generation can love and relate to.

Criteria 1 and 3 are easy enough. Number 1 - stick to the tv lore - this is defined as all of the Doctor's eight previous screen personas (including Paul McGann) and everything that was explained onscreen during the course of those adventures - so yes, the Doctor is half human and can bed one of his assistants if he so feels inclined. Invent something else if aforementioned lore is inconvenient.

Number 3 - balancing the programme for a whole new audience. Easy. We introduce old foes (Autons, Daleks et al - all very familiar to us, but not to the new generation of fans), we show them pointing a gun, we hear a shot, but we don't show the people falling or lying on the ground pouring with blood.

Plus - the Daleks are the Doctor's mortal enemy. We know that, but it has to be explained to the new audience, and also the reason why. (DW without the Daleks would be pretty much unthinkable, even if they were only in the first series). So setting them up as the destroyers of Gallifrey would accomplish these aims in one easy stroke.

I'm not saying this is how ievents will definitely unfold - that, of course, is up to the writers. But based on all of the above thinking, it's my best guess as to how events will unfold given the evidence we have so far.

(Very little of course, as we've only had two episodes)

Of course, those who took the continuing adventures too much to heart will be a little unhappy that the Daleks destroyed Gallifrey instead of civil war, but so what?

For anyone who's interested in the "continuing" or "offscreen" adventures, McCoy did not destroy Skaro with the hand of Omega. The Dalek Supreme on Skaro discovered the Doctor's plan and moved Skaro out of harm's way, replacing it with a similar planet, placed in Skaro's orbit in order to fool the Doctor.
Last edited by DenWatts : 07-04-2005 at 16:08

Good old Doctor Who canon - I haven't seen a debate like this since the BBC Closed their boards last year.

The problem with any debate on Doctor Who canon is that there is no official canon or continuity held by anybody - unlike Babylon 5 which did have an overall plan.

The programme contradicted itself over the course of the initial run - Is the Matrix part of the APC Net or vice versa? How come the first Doctor didn't recognise The Master but the Third knew all about him? It's therefore very difficult to pin anything down. (plus The Daleks putting the Master on Trial in the TV Movie? What was that about?)

The other problem with their being no official canon is that any writer who did not like something that happened before just wrote a way out - e.g. Doctor destroys Skaro but little did he know that the Daleks rumbled the plan and moved the planet?

And then there's the fans - bless em You get some who can quote every little bit. Others who think the Doctor has been in the shower (ala Bobby Ewing) since Tom Baker went and Davison, C Baker, McCoy and McGann (and for that matter Richard E Grant as Doctor 8 and a half) has all been a dream and will only believe what they want.

Please do not get me wrong - I'm not criticising anybody for this fascinating (for me anyway) debate - I'm just trying to put it into perspective for anybody else.

Personally I think the answer will unfold over the remaining 11 episodes and then we can see whether RTD nd the rest have taken notice of the books.

What an amazingly well thought out argument There is really nothing there that I can fault I have to agree with you completely.

Now as a tight wad I need to surce these books second hand

I think as much as we can all discuss it here, the truth is exactly that.

Yeah it's fun to surmise what nods to the timeline and nods RTD is giving, and I'm sure he is but biottom line he was aked to breethe life into a dead (and defunct) TV series and so far he has done it admirably and without doubt he knows exactly where this is going

I'm a bit confused at this post.

You are quoting a post where Den Watts clarified that he didn't misunderstand where I was coming from.

So what i don't understand is why you felt that was an amazingly well thought out argument.
What's the argument???
He's just clearing something up between he and I so that we know that we're on the same wavelength. I don't understand how you could possibly find fault in someone clarifying a possible misunderstanding anyway:

Did you quote the right post there?

Thanks Urban Bassman for bringing this back down to earth for everyone. It can become a bit much for some people and I'd hate to think I'd put other people off by going into too much depth.

I am enjoying the debate though. It's great fun to bounce ideas off each other, and it also helps me get my own thoughts into some sort of coherent order by 'writing' them down...

You are perfectly correct when you say the answer will unfold over the course of the next 11 episodes. I certainly put enough references to this amongst my posts. We could speculate for months, but ultimately, what we will actually see unfold will be up to the writers.

I do agree with your comment on canon. The so-called 'official' lore is very hard to pin down, simply due to the fact that successive writers have contradicted each other in the past (hence my - almost - flippant comment about inventing something if the lore gets in the way). And nobody officially keeps 'track' of it anyway, as you say.

Two things that do keep coming back to me though, is RTD stating that this series is a 'reboot' of the original - makes me wonder just how much of the past 'lore' he will stick with, and the fact that this is a 'love' story between the Doctor and Rose - although going on his past writings, I'd suspect it wouldn't be a love story in the conventional sense.

Anyway, I'm enjoying the mature level of the debate. I'm not saying I'm a DW obsessive, but I've always been an enthusiast. I'm quite sure that if a 'real' hardcore fan joined in the debate, they could put up three counter-arguments to each of my one.
Last edited by DenWatts : 07-04-2005 at 19:04

Thankyou for your kind compliment. I write every now and then (nothing you might have read) and it always amazes me that people find it entertaining, on whatever level .

Looking at the length of the posts I've made on here over the past day or two, I could have written a book or two myself by now (but that's for another day).

As for getting the novels secondhand, I can't offer you much help except the usual 'check old bookshops' etc. Conventions are a good source too, I believe. The one thing that I can say is that originally, Virgin Publishing used to put them out. The BBC took them back 'in-house' around the time of the eighth Doctor's arrival (if I remember the time period correctly ) so there are two types of cover. But generally, the BBC books continued straight after the Virgin ones, if you were looking to read them in some kind of order.

---------------------------

There were many reasons I enjoyed the books - the expanded universe, the more in-depth treatments (not to mention that with the books continuing the story, DW never really went away). But one of the main reasons was the fact that they continued McCoy's Doctor, and expanded on his role as a 'cosmic chessplayer' or manipulator, as portrayed during his tv reign. I always thought he was incredibly undervalued as the Doctor.

As Urban Bassman said, some 'purists' would have you believe that Davidson, C.Baker, McCoy etc. were all a bad dream. I've known worse than that - I've actually overheard some people discussing that the only 'real' Doctor was the first one, Hartnell.

Ultimately of course, they were all the Doctor. And thanks to the efforts of all the previous incarnations, and people's continued support, we have a whole new series of adventures to enjoy, with the promise of another series to look forward to next year.

Didn't someone once say "You've never had it so good?"
I don't think we have.
Last edited by DenWatts : 07-04-2005 at 19:29

Going by the quality of the scripts, the acting and the attention to detail with costumes, sets and sfx I don't think we have had it this good in quite a while!

Get the feeling RTD has some marvellous twist in store for us regarding the destruction of Gallifrey...

Really enjoyed reading a lot of the theories on here, even some of the more complicated idea's ....any more thoughts on the subject...?

I was rather sad when I heard Gallifrey was no more. I quite liked the occasional visit back so the Doctor could stir them up a bit...
Last edited by Black Guardian : 08-04-2005 at 23:19

Ah, a fellow fan - wonderful. Thought you were when I saw you post in the general threads.

I agree there will be many twists. RTD is an excellent writer and seems to be on a roll at the moment. I'm sure it won't be quite as clear-cut as my theory suggests, although I think the framework is sound enough given the evidence we have so far. I'll probably add to it after watching tonight's episode.

And yes, I liked the occaisional visits home for the Doctor. The way he frowned upon their lifestyle every bit as much as they did his. Always good when he shook them up a bit....

Black Guardian, maybe you would do us the honour of creating the thread for tonight's episode?

The forums light up with DW posts after an episode has aired, so I expect there will be lots around 7.45pm tonight. Although this thread has been exceptional in terms of the quality of posts and wonderful exchange of ideas.

So how do you see this whole destruction of Gallifrey panning out over the series?

I like the idea of The Doctor being the last Time Lord as it gives him even more distance and isolation from everyone else but I can't help feeling that RTD has a twist in the tale of the war that destroyed the planet...what do you think?

Would be more than happy to start/join the thread after the episode tonight. Having seen Simon Callow play Dickens before I know we are in for a treat!

THE END OF THE WORLD
Really liked this episode. In forty five minutes, it had me laughing and then made my eyes go wet.... *sniff*

Rose's response to the arrival of the aliens was a joy, so understated.

The little scene with with Rose giving permission for the service worker to speak has been done before, but it was lovely seeing Rose struggle with how to give permission.

The five-billion year telephone conversation. A bit silly, but again Billie Piper and RTD turned it into something quiet poignant.

Jabe was a fantastic character. A credit to the writing that I felt sad for DAYS after at her demise. I wanted her to be in it again...

Rose's speech about "too busy saving ourselves and we missed it" was beautiful. Then the bit about chips was a welcome lifting of the mood.

Billie Piper is amazing. The way you can see things dawn on her is brilliant. You know when you read the Target novelisations, and the companions seemed so real? They DID things, they had a life, they seemed alive... and then you watched a repeat and saw how they were rendered on screen and it was all a bit of a disappointment? Well, Rose to me is the best bits of all the best companions, in the hands of a brilliant actress. She's like the companions all should and could have been...

And the revelation about Gallifrey... oooh! I have a feeling we're going to revisit this plot...