Series 5, Episode 5 - "Flesh and Stone"

mewso

Well we can try and excuse it or make it sound as logical as we want but I still say it isn't very inconsistent. If you are given the basic information that a creature cannot move if someone can see them while it is a science fiction idea the obvious rules will start to form in your mind. If I see their back they can't move. Fine because it's the actual event of someone seeing them that stops them moving not what they think is the case. So if this is the basic rule then it doesn't matter if they are scared or having a cup of tea.

Now if they stop moving when they think they are being observed that opens a whole can of worms. I could theoretically observe a whole flock of them playing poker as long as they didn't know I was there until finally I coughed and they all froze. It's just a ridiculous idea. Yes yes someone will say why over think a sci-fi idea. Well sci-fi like any good fiction needs to be consistent.

VicNoir

To be honest, despite my defence of it, the idea did jar a bit and I would have preferred if, for example, River were to watch the Angels on a camera while Amy wandered through them (though that would have led to problems of it's own).

Doctor DooM

mewso wrote: »

Well we can try and excuse it or make it sound as logical as we want but I still say it isn't very inconsistent. If you are given the basic information that a creature cannot move if someone can see them while it is a science fiction idea the obvious rules will start to form in your mind. If I see their back they can't move. Fine because it's the actual event of someone seeing them that stops them moving not what they think is the case. So if this is the basic rule then it doesn't matter if they are scared or having a cup of tea.

Now if they stop moving when they think they are being observed that opens a whole can of worms. I could theoretically observe a whole flock of them playing poker as long as they didn't know I was there until finally I coughed and they all froze. It's just a ridiculous idea. Yes yes someone will say why over think a sci-fi idea. Well sci-fi like any good fiction needs to be consistent.

But they're not breaching the rule.

If she saw them they would HAVE to stop.

However in this one case they were stopping because they were scared witless. The difference between someone restraining you and you being scared stiff. Unless she made it obvious she was free food, they weren't going to pay her attention. It worked for me, she didn't even manage it.

Believe me I am the first to jump at Dr Who for internal inconsistency but this wasn't one for me.

That said, suspension of disbelief is a weird thing and different for everyone.

mewso

Doctor DooM wrote: »

Unless she made it obvious she was free food, they weren't going to pay her attention. It worked for me, she didn't even manage it.

Thats a completely different explanation. Was it not said in the episode essentially - make them think you can see them? I'll have to watch it again. I don't remember it being - make them think you can see them as they are so scared they won't bother with you unless you look like someone who can't see them. If the theory here is - being observed incapacitates the creature - then at what point does the creature become aware that they are not being observed - when they can move surely. Scared or not.

Ergh it was a minor irk with me that I thought I would mention since it was being so highly praised. Maybe I have gone too far on the bleedin thing now. Fine scared statues, more likely to not notice they can move.

iUseVi

Seemed consistent to me. If they are seen moving they "die" or something, and they weren't sure about whether she could see or not.

Although this begs the question, how do they know if you are looking? But I think that's getting into it a bit. I'm happy to leave it at "it's a quantum thing". Timely wimey wobbly etc.

nommm

I'm after reading some good theories regarding why when the doctor returned to talk to Amy he had a different clothes on and seemed to be acting differently.:D I really hope they turn out to be true.

Daemos

mewso wrote: »

Thats a completely different explanation. Was it not said in the episode essentially - make them think you can see them? I'll have to watch it again. I don't remember it being - make them think you can see them as they are so scared they won't bother with you unless you look like someone who can't see them.

It was the latter, he did say their instincts were on high alert so they'd freeze if they think you're looking at them, even if you're not.

I do agree it's a niggly area, because in Blink they are stone when Sally and your man are in the Tardis, so who or what is looking at them? I like to think it's a cat or something looking through the window because The Doctor said they freeze in the sight of any living thing, so yeah, if you think about it enough there are alot of holes you could spot in the logic

Even Moffat said as much in the commentary for Blink, he joked that all you have to do is stick a bucket over their heads and they're free again

Jessibelle

DaPoolRulz wrote: »

Even Moffat said as much in the commentary for Blink, he joked that all you have to do is stick a bucket over their heads and they're free again

But what if it was a some what shiny inside reflective bucket? The angel would be looking into the eyes of an image of an angel which would form an angel inside the angel which then would be looking through the eyes of an angel staring in the eyes of an angel.....:eek:


Overall I enjoyed it but not so much as the first part. As much as I don't like the Angels, I don't like the fact they may now never exist even more. Angel Bob was brilliantly done, but I didn't like the maliciousness in them now,the killing and scaring for 'kicks' annoyed me, they were more scary to me as the worlds nicest serial killers for some reason:o

Sleepy

One ship of angels does not represent the entire race. Moffat hasn't done a genocide on his best creation to date. It's one of the things I disliked about RTD's writing - he kept putting the doctor in a position where he had to wipe out entire species instead of just the immediate threat.

Jessibelle

Then, if the Angels on the ship never existed, why where they all still on the planet at the end, and not instantly elsewhere? And should Octavian not be alive again, as the Angel that killed him now never existed?



my head hurts...;)

Daemos

Jessibelle wrote: »

Then, if the Angels on the ship never existed, why where they all still on the planet at the end, and not instantly elsewhere?

Because they're time travellers, changes their perception

Jessibelle wrote: »

And should Octavian not be alive again, as the Angel that killed him now never existed?

Wibbly wobbly...

Killer_banana

Jessibelle wrote: »

should Octavian not be alive again, as the Angel that killed him now never existed?



my head hurts...;)

Octavian's body was probably swallowed by the crack as well meaning he never existed either...I'm guessing

GSPfan

This inconsistancy with the Angels episode could turn out to be a Moffat trick.

You see..... When the Doctor got grabbed by the Angel they froze and didn't kill him and he remarked "Why am I not dead?". Then The Doctor's Coat returns when he tells Amy to "Remember what I told you when you were 7".

There's a theory that the Doctor with the coat is a future version of the Doctor. So assuming it is and assuming he is in the forest waiting for his moment to talk to Amy then maybe he was the one looking at the angels and made them freeze as they grabbed the doctors coat. ????

I would love this to be true as to make this episode even more brilliant.

BaconZombie

There is a good discussion on the Doctor Who SubReddit about the doctor who tells he to remember is from the future:

About 17 minutes in, the Doctor talks to Amy about trusting him and tells her to remember.

If you look closely, he's wearing his jacket. However, his jacket was stolen by the Weeping Angels earlier and when we see him next, he doesn't have the jacket either.

Significant?

http://www.reddit.com/r/doctorwho/comments/bysuj/flesh_and_stone_discussion_spoilers/c0p8pj7

BaconZombie

Different watch as well:

GSPfan wrote: »

This inconsistancy with the Angels episode could turn out to be a Moffat trick.

You see..... When the Doctor got grabbed by the Angel they froze and didn't kill him and he remarked "Why am I not dead?". Then The Doctor's Coat returns when he tells Amy to "Remember what I told you when you were 7".

There's a theory that the Doctor with the coat is a future version of the Doctor. So assuming it is and assuming he is in the forest waiting for his moment to talk to Amy then maybe he was the one looking at the angels and made them freeze as they grabbed the doctors coat. ????

I would love this to be true as to make this episode even more brilliant.

Daemos

Ah very good. And when he did come back to talk to Amy in the forest it did seem like he came out of nowhere.

If it's true and not a wardrobe mistake, Moffat is a genius

Jessibelle

DaPoolRulz wrote: »

Because they're time travellers, changes their perception

Then wouldn't that make River's plea for time off for good behaviour kind of hard? "I saved us all from the Weeping Angels?" "Er...what Angels?"

Gah! The more I think, the more this episode annoys me, recommencing suspension of disbelief in 5,4,...

popebenny16

Sleepy wrote: »

It's one of the things I disliked about RTD's writing - he kept putting the doctor in a position where he had to wipe out entire species instead of just the immediate threat.

And yet 10 gave out stink to human 10 for just doing that. But he was always sorry, and he always gave you a chance.

DaPoolRulz wrote: »

Ah very good. And when he did come back to talk to Amy in the forest it did seem like he came out of nowhere.

If it's true and not a wardrobe mistake, Moffat is a genius

the jacket would be a wardrobe malfunction but the watch is interesting as they were on location and to bring a second watch would be a deliberate script request. Unless its Matts watch and he forgot to switch it.......

sensibleken

the only thing that annoyed me was why did the clerics bring guns if they knew they wouldnt work. surely chisels would be the best armament

Ginny

sensibleken wrote: »

the only thing that annoyed me was why did the clerics bring guns if they knew they wouldnt work. surely chisels would be the best armament

Or sledgehammers...

Pittens

Gah! The more I think, the more this episode annoys me, recommencing suspension of disbelief in 5,4,...

3,2,1.

Wibly wobbly.

There now. Fixed.

The Recliner

Ginny wrote: »

Or sledgehammers...

A feckload of C4 explosives would have been my choice

Stark

Jessibelle wrote: »

Then, if the Angels on the ship never existed, why where they all still on the planet at the end, and not instantly elsewhere? And should Octavian not be alive again, as the Angel that killed him now never existed?



my head hurts...;)

I think he got swallowed up by the time energy as well.

iMax

Biggest problem with this episode is they split it in two. Should have been screened in whole. I want a movie with the angels !!

Stark

DaPoolRulz wrote: »

It was the latter, he did say their instincts were on high alert so they'd freeze if they think you're looking at them, even if you're not.

I do agree it's a niggly area, because in Blink they are stone when Sally and your man are in the Tardis, so who or what is looking at them? I like to think it's a cat or something looking through the window because The Doctor said they freeze in the sight of any living thing, so yeah, if you think about it enough there are alot of holes you could spot in the logic

Even Moffat said as much in the commentary for Blink, he joked that all you have to do is stick a bucket over their heads and they're free again

I'd hate to be the poor person who has to change the lightbulb in that room.

Raedwald

They seemed to make a bit of hullabaloo at the start of the series about how the doctor doesnt get involved unless the children are crying. And in the first few episodes they showed the children crying.

I know the baddies are crying angels, but they weren't children. So who was the crying child in these episodes ( Possible link to River, something to her name maybe) or was there even one as i never noticed one.

Also that grainy image when River and the Doctor where in the teleport room, was defiantly an eye looking at what was going on and possibly listening to the conversation. Big question is whose eye is it? and are they spying or looking on the past from the future.

Daemos

Raedwald wrote: »

They seemed to make a bit of hullabaloo at the start of the series about how the doctor doesnt get involved unless the children are crying. And in the first few episodes they showed the children crying.

I know the baddies are crying angels, but they weren't children. So who was the crying child in these episodes ( Possible link to River, something to her name maybe) or was there even one as i never noticed one.

I don't really think it's a big thing, it was just something The Doctor said in episode 2 as an excuse to investigate, and Amy used it to solve the problem. Besides, since when has he ever not gotten involved with events when he sees something's up?

GSPfan

Raedwald wrote: »

They seemed to make a bit of hullabaloo at the start of the series about how the doctor doesnt get involved unless the children are crying. And in the first few episodes they showed the children crying.

I know the baddies are crying angels, but they weren't children. So who was the crying child in these episodes ( Possible link to River, something to her name maybe) or was there even one as i never noticed one.

Also that grainy image when River and the Doctor where in the teleport room, was defiantly an eye looking at what was going on and possibly listening to the conversation. Big question is whose eye is it? and are they spying or looking on the past from the future.

Is he 'avin a laff? Are you 'avin a Laff?
He told Amy that he never gets involved, he just observes. Then he went straight outside and got involved. It was a form of sarcasm I suppose. We all know he gets involved everywhere he goes.

smk89

Im really surprised at this and episode 4. I thought people would have learned their lesson from scream, scream 2 and other "horror" movies.
Never send 2 lone black guys in group 2 when all the white guys are travelling the other way. And then don't send the only characterised scared white guy after them when they fail to show up.
You'd think the military would be trained to deal with this in the 50th or whatever century

The Master

Still hate this forum..

But I must say although the time cracks story/arc seems to resolving itself this episode revealed a huge clue to the series finale