**Spoilers** Series 6, Episode 7 - "A Good Man Goes To War"

Yahew

phil1nj wrote: »

?????????????????

Not sure what you are confused about. When Dr. Who does something which might be relevant to it's story as a time travel, there are two options: it could be relevant, or it could be because it is a fact imposed by necessity.

So when the Dr. meets Alex Kingston and she has a diary, it explains to us that she is probably going to turn up again. The writers, as we have seen, have planned that in. When he loses his jacket - in a scene where that is signalled quite strongly - and it appears in the next scene, that is part of the script.

When a 200 year older Doctor dies nothing can be gleaned from the fact that the doctor looks like 11, because Matt Smith is the guy now playing the Doctor. A regenerated Doctor ( i.e. different actor) would fairly ruin Ep. 1.

There is nothing to worry about there within the series - just that they have to use Matt Smith as that is who they have. Its like worrying about aliens having English accents.

The Mad Hatter

Yahew wrote: »

Not sure what you are confused about. When Dr. Who does something which might be relevant to it's story as a time travel, there are two options: it could be relevant, or it could be because it is a fact imposed by necessity.

So when the Dr. meets Alex Kingston and she has a diary, it explains to us that she is probably going to turn up again. The writers, as we have seen, have planned that in. When he loses his jacket - in a scene where that is signalled quite strongly - and it appears in the next scene, that is part of the script.

When a 200 year older Doctor dies nothing can be gleaned from the fact that the doctor looks like 11, because Matt Smith is the guy now playing the Doctor. A regenerated Doctor ( i.e. different actor) would fairly ruin Ep. 1.

There is nothing to worry about there within the series - just that they have to use Matt Smith as that is who they have. Its like worrying about aliens having English accents.

One of these things is not like the others.

Yahew

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

One of these things is not like the others.

Quite like the other, in terms of necessity. I am assuming some regenerations between now and the doctor's death, and that the doctor being killed is not 11.

he needs to look like 11 as he dies, thats all. Nevertheless he is, I think, most definitely dead.

But he looks like 11, because Matt Smith is now playing the doctor. It doesnt mean no new regenerations.

phil1nj

Yahew wrote: »

When a 200 year older Doctor dies nothing can be gleaned from the fact that the doctor looks like 11, because Matt Smith is the guy now playing the Doctor. A regenerated Doctor ( i.e. different actor) would fairly ruin Ep. 1.
.

Yeah, sure, whatever you say. Tell me this, do you actually watch the show? There have been episodes that have actually put several incarnations of the Doctor together on the screen at the same time. Funny thing is they weren't all played by the same actor (spolier: they used the same actors who actually played their version of the doctor).

The most recent one was when the 10th Doctor met the 5th doctor as part of the Children in Need programming. The 5th Doctors' "aged" appearence was explained quite easily by the 10th. Following your logic, David Tennant should have played both versions just so we didn't get confused.

Yahew

phil1nj wrote: »

Yeah, sure, whatever you say. Tell me this, do you actually watch the show? There have been episodes that have actually put several incarnations of the Doctor together on the screen at the same time. Funny thing is they weren't all played by the same actor (spolier: they used the same actors who actually played their version of the doctor).

The most recent one was when the 10th Doctor met the 5th doctor as part of the Children in Need programming. The 5th Doctors' "aged" appearence was explained quite easily by the 10th. Following your logic, David Tennant should have played both versions just so we didn't get confused.

Why was he "aged" and not aged?

Not a fan of doctors getting together myself. By necessity I mean the particular necessity of a particular episode, and its dynamic structure. With a different doctor the impossible astronaut would have started with this doctor from the future, having to explain himself and who he was. His death would have been less of an emotional issue because we would have been expecting, all along, for the Matt Smith version to turn up.

We can wonder about this within the program, or we can say " Given the nature of the dramatic structure here lets not worry about the fact that the dead doctor looked like Smith".

They probably will explain it, but they dont have to.

jasonb

The problem though, compared to other programs, is that in Doctor Who the fact that different actors have played the Doctor has been explained by regeneration, they've gone out of their way to make it part of the canon.

So, in a 'normal' series, even one with Time Travel, if you see a character die of course they're going to use the actor playing that character, that's who they have ( as you have said ).

However, in a program like Doctor Who, where the fact that the main character can look completely different is part of the story, then having that Character die looking like one person does restrict them somewhat.

Assuming that the Doctor who died is the real Doctor, and assuming he's really dead ( and we don't get time re-written / universes rebooted etc. ) then the program is basically saying that when the Doctor died he looked like Matt Smith. They might explain it away by saying that the 200 year in the future Doctor used some technology to look like Matt Smith ( so that Rory & Amy etc. would know him and trust him ). They might explain it some other way, who knows. But imho it does need an explanation...

J.

phil1nj

jasonb wrote: »

Assuming that the Doctor who died is the real Doctor, and assuming he's really dead ( and we don't get time re-written / universes rebooted etc. ) then the program is basically saying that when the Doctor died he looked like Matt Smith. They might explain it away by saying that the 200 year in the future Doctor used some technology to look like Matt Smith ( so that Rory & Amy etc. would know him and trust him ). They might explain it some other way, who knows. But imho it does need an explanation...

J.

It's also a bit arrogant on the part of the writers to assume that their incarnation of the Doctor will be the last one, even if he is from 200 years in the future. It also allows the Astronaut character to act as a loose end until such a time as well. I'm one of those who are expecting an explanation to be given as to what really happened on the beach in the first episode - who was in the suit, was it really the Doctor that got zapped?
Also, lets not forget that Amy has pretty much let the cat out of the bag regarding the Doctor's death (was she talking to the ganger Doctor or the real Doctor in the foundry ??). I predict a twist something similar to what happened in the first Back to The Future movie whereby Doc Brown was warned of his death in 1955 and took steps to avoid it. He was still shot by the Libyans but the outcome was very, very different. Anyway time will tell.

ríomhaire

The Doctor might be dead for real but it doesn't mean he'll stay that way. Let's remember that Rory also died for real and I didn't find the way he was brought back (twice) cheap or badly written at all. I trust Moffat to conclude everything in style.

Gambler

phil1nj wrote: »

Yeah, sure, whatever you say. Tell me this, do you actually watch the show?

Careful now! No need to get testy...

phil1nj wrote: »

There have been episodes that have actually put several incarnations of the Doctor together on the screen at the same time. Funny thing is they weren't all played by the same actor (spolier: they used the same actors who actually played their version of the doctor).

The most recent one was when the 10th Doctor met the 5th doctor as part of the Children in Need programming. The 5th Doctors' "aged" appearence was explained quite easily by the 10th. Following your logic, David Tennant should have played both versions just so we didn't get confused.

For those that haven't seen the clip you mention:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWzt7cmWImY

The Mad Hatter

ríomhaire wrote: »

The Doctor might be dead for real but it doesn't mean he'll stay that way. Let's remember that Rory also died for real and I didn't find the way he was brought back (twice) cheap or badly written at all. I trust Moffat to conclude everything in style.

And The Master. He was cremated too.

The Master

I can never be killed

Wibbs

This is true. I've tried. FYI Unusually for a Gallifreyan he's completely impervious to alcohol poisoning.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

I didn't bother watching this until just now, I haven't really enjoyed this season (or much of last season) at all and I just was not bothered downloading the episode to give it a go.

glad I did now, to be honest I loved it. The river song is amys daughter thing was thrown about on this forum a few times and it seemed just silly enough to be possible, so that wasn't a huge surprise but it was still nice. Matt smith for some incredible reason was able to act in this episode, I was pretty impressed.

Also, if it does turn out that river song is the person in the space suit that kills the doctor.. totally called it in the thread on the first ep of this season.

ríomhaire

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

And The Master. He was cremated too.

On the other hand I did find how the Master was brought back completely cheap and stupid. It was basically magic by a cult he had conveniently set up but had not been mentioned before and he got lightning powers for no good reason. It's like RTD just wrote down every random idea he got and worked it into the script.

The Mad Hatter

ríomhaire wrote: »

On the other hand I did find how the Master was brought back completely cheap and stupid. It was basically magic by a cult he had conveniently set up but had not been mentioned before and he got lightning powers for no good reason. It's like RTD just wrote down every random idea he got and worked it into the script.

Yup. That episode was an absolute mess.

MrVestek

ríomhaire wrote: »

On the other hand I did find how the Master was brought back completely cheap and stupid. It was basically magic by a cult he had conveniently set up but had not been mentioned before and he got lightning powers for no good reason. It's like RTD just wrote down every random idea he got and worked it into the script.

Never... never... NEVER DYING! NEVER DYING!!!!

Also apparently if you feck with the resurrection of a timelord it bleaches their hair :eek:

Doctor DooM

Achilles wrote: »

Never... never... NEVER DYING! NEVER DYING!!!!

Also apparently if you feck with the resurrection of a timelord it bleaches their hair :eek:

Perhaps if you did it just right he'd regenerate ginger?

Killer_banana

Achilles wrote: »

Never... never... NEVER DYING! NEVER DYING!!!!

Also apparently if you feck with the resurrection of a timelord it bleaches their hair :eek:

I remember someone on confidential saying him bleaching his hair was a crap attempt at disguising himself since he hadn't gotten a whole new face to help him fool the Doctor. 'Cause y'know, between the living off free burgers in a junk yard and pursuing his arch enemy he had time to pop to the hairdresser.

Penn

I thought The Master's lightning powers, hair and x-ray face were a result of Lucy Saxon throwing the potion at him to kill him but it failing.

Or maybe I've tried to justify that episode in my own head.

I'm still hopeful that Joshua Naysmith becomes a full companion of The Doctor some day.

pixelburp

Ha; god can we stop talking about Tennant's last story? It's bringing back the horrible memories of watching it.

Speedsie

jasonb wrote: »

t. Firstly, with 'when was Amy swapped?', I'm thinking it was after she told the Doctor she was pregnant ( as we know now that she is ) and before she told the Doctor that she wasn't pregnant any more ( as the flesh isn't )?

Just thinking about 'when was Amy swapped/taken' - does anyone think that the 'Omega' symbol burnt into the lawn outside Amy's aunt's house at the end of season 5 is significant?

It is the same as the insignia of the Church Army all over Demon's Run.

Just thinking...

The Mad Hatter

Speedsie wrote: »

Just thinking about 'when was Amy swapped/taken' - does anyone think that the 'Omega' symbol burnt into the lawn outside Amy's aunt's house at the end of season 5 is significant?

The what now?

Ahoyhoy

kiddums wrote: »

Am I the only one who noticed that the line 'When a good man goes to war...' could apply not only to The Doctor but to Rory too

I agree, they've been at pains over this series and a few eps in the last one, to show that Amy reveres both the Doctor and Rory equally, leaving Rory in doubt as to who she loved. It could be a parallel with River since she's his daughter. When she talks about the greatest man she's ever known we assume she's talking about the Doctor. Just as when Amy was taken by the Silence and Rory was listening to her on the red thingy, we assumed she was talking about loving the Doctor, but it was Rory all along.

It could fit very well into a romantic Father/Daughter sort of genre, you know, the greatest man a girl has ever known will always be her father etc. The Doctor is her white knight but Rory is her idol.

Speedsie

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

The what now?

Well, it's not exactly an omega - kind of squared off,
From either Flesh & Stone or Time of Angels


From A Good Man Goes to War


This is a standard Omega Symbol


God is the Alpha & Omega, Omega representing the end, and Alpha the beginning. If in the 31st century 'Doctor' is starting to mean 'Warrior' rather than 'Healer' or 'Learned Man', and 'The Church' is the 'Military' , with the 'Anglican Marines' and 'Headless Monks' as a kind of Paras, perhaps this symbol means something.

And I seem to remember it being burnt into the grass out side Amy's Aunt Sharon's house in Leadworth in Series 5 - either the 12 or 13th episode - I'd need to look at them again. Could it be possible that the 'Church' at the behest of Madame Kovarian took Amy all the way back then... and left a burn mark of their insignia as some sort of marker...

Course, I could be really overthinking this one.

ríomhaire

Seems pretty dumb to kidnap someone and leaving a big marker to be identified by.

The Mad Hatter

Speedsie wrote: »

And I seem to remember it being burnt into the grass out side Amy's Aunt Sharon's house in Leadworth in Series 5 - either the 12 or 13th episode - I'd need to look at them again. Could it be possible that the 'Church' at the behest of Madame Kovarian took Amy all the way back then... and left a burn mark of their insignia as some sort of marker...

Yeah, I'd seen that symbol all right, but not in Amy's aunt's garden - that was what I was asking about. Had a quick look through The Big Bang and didn't see it...

InisMor

Hi,

Very disappointed by this episode's final moments.

I disliked River Song/Alex Kingston (both of them) right from the very start. It has grown into hatred with each of her appearances.

However, in a surprise to even myself, I'm able to set that to the side and look at this "revelation" objectively.

And it is stupid.

River is Amy and Rory's daughter and yet in all her appearances has shown absolutely no affection or interest in either one of them.

And if all the references Song has made to a sexual relationship with the Doctor are to be believed, Moffat has made the last Timelord a dirty old man who has been having sex with his best friends' daughter.

Madness, I tells you. Madness.

I truly hope that the next half of the season marks Song's last appearance in the show (or at the very least Kingston's - regenerate her if nothing else).

Why did Steven Moffat not use characters, indebted to the Doctor, who had actually appeared in the show before?

I had assumed when watching it that I'd missed those episodes, but I googled the names earlier, and apart from Dorium, none have ever appeared in the show before!!!

And the drama of the real Baby Melody being long gone was kind of killed by Rory choosing to comfort a dying Strax rather than Amy, or even to show some grief.

Very much in the way of being pants!!!!

Unpossible

InisMor wrote: »

Why did Steven Moffat not use characters, indebted to the Doctor, who had actually appeared in the show before?

I had assumed when watching it that I'd missed those episodes, but I googled the names earlier, and apart from Dorium, none have ever appeared in the show before!!!

I haven't seen the episode in a while, but weren't the army of green lizards the ones that the doctor helped in the last series? The lived underground and geologists had woken them up.

Actually hang on, do you mean important characters or background ones like the pirates?

ríomhaire

Unpossible wrote: »

I haven't seen the episode in a while, but weren't the army of green lizards the ones that the doctor helped in the last series? The lived underground and geologists had woken them up.

Actually hang on, do you mean important characters or background ones like the pirates?

It was a different group of lizards. Same species, different tribe.

The pilots from Victory of the Daleks and the Avery returned. As for not using previously established characters I rather forgive it for Strax and the Silurian woman being awesome.

InisMor

Unpossible wrote: »

I haven't seen the episode in a while, but weren't the army of green lizards the ones that the doctor helped in the last series? The lived underground and geologists had woken them up.

But that episode was set in the 21st century. Vastra and her assistant Jenny were from 1888.

InisMor

ríomhaire wrote: »

The pilots from Victory of the Daleks and the Avery returned. As for not using previously established characters I rather forgive it for Strax and the Silurian woman being awesome.

On their being awesome, I agree.:)

Perhaps it is better if I ask that, instead of using previously seen characters, why the hell we haven't seen these characters before!?!

It's obvious that the nurse punishment was the Doctor's idea and clearly Vastra and the Doctor are meant to have encountered each other more than once before - she knows quite a bit about the Timelords and actually calls him friend. Here I was going to say that The Hungry Earth/Cold Blood was the Doctor's first contact with the Silurans, but while typing I also googling - this time the Siluran race itself rather than just the character Vastra - and this is, of course wrong. They'd appeared twice before on TV.

A shame we won't get to see those first adventure, but I suspect Vastra and Jenny will be back in future episodes.

Speedsie

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Yeah, I'd seen that symbol all right, but not in Amy's aunt's garden - that was what I was asking about. Had a quick look through The Big Bang and didn't see it...

My bad, the scorch marks are 35 mins into 'The Pandorica Opens' and they are not the same as the Church insignia It was a while since I'd seen the episode....

The Mad Hatter

Speedsie wrote: »

My bad, the scorch marks are 35 mins into 'The Pandorica Opens' and they are not the same as the Church insignia It was a while since I'd seen the episode....

Ah yes, now I remember. I think at the time I took it to be some kind of alien footprint…

phil1nj

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Ah yes, now I remember. I think at the time I took it to be some kind of alien footprint…

Or the footprint of a landing spacecraft......

BaconZombie

Banjo Fella

I really enjoyed this episode, and in particular I loved the Sontaran nurse and the 19th-century crime-fighting interspecies couple! Unfortunately, I thought the revelation at the end was a bit disappointing. It was well executed, but I was hoping for something a little... less creepy, for starters.

It just opens so many cans of worrying worms and a Pandorica's boxworth of ickiness. If they manage to rescue Melody as a child, Amy will have to contend with the idea that her daughter goes on to kiss the Doctor... something which she previously did herself! She'll have overheard River talking about being "quite the screamer", and so on, too. Plus, River supposedly meets the Doctor for the first time when she's quite young, at which point the Doctor already knows everything about their future relationship. It's all a bit, er... do not want. Also, I doubt this ever happened, but I sincerely hope River's flirtiness didn't extend as far as Rory in any of the previous episodes. o_o

It seems a little bit contrived that all of the series' main characters have to be so interconnected. I kind of preferred when River was just a random badass intergalactic archaeologist ladydude. I suppose we'll have to see how this pans out, anyway. There's still another half to the series, and the TARDIS trio's interactions with young Melody could significantly alter the current relationship between the characters.

The Mad Hatter

BaconZombie wrote: »

<Snip big pic>

Ooh, interesting (if potentially spoilery). I'd say it's more likely a family heirloom than any hint that they're the same character.

ríomhaire

Probably just reusing something from the costume department.

pixelburp

BaconZombie wrote: »

Haha, sometimes this is why I hate genre TV - we have a tendency to really zero on & obsess about some otherwise innocuous things

The Mad Hatter

ríomhaire wrote: »

Probably just reusing something from the costume department.

Ha! Or that!

Yahew

InisMor wrote: »

Hi,

And it is stupid.

River is Amy and Rory's daughter and yet in all her appearances has shown absolutely no affection or interest in either one of them.

She is going backwards in our time and so she hasn't meet them for the first time in our line, until possibly that very episode where she does act weird with Rory ( who asks her have they met yet). In the meantime she got over it. I doubt if she grew up with them anyway. I bet she was trained to kill the doctor as a child and morphed into adult form early enough.

And if all the references Song has made to a sexual relationship with the Doctor are to be believed, Moffat has made the last Timelord a dirty old man who has been having sex with his best friends' daughter.

Not a big deal for a time traveller. Really.

Perhaps it is better if I ask that, instead of using previously seen characters, why the hell we haven't seen these characters before!?!

We're not seeing everything he does in the TV show, the last season didnt last 12 of their days. We get edited highlights. And these characters can appear in other media now.

Jenny did meet him before, but he doesnt remember her so she will appear in a future episode I guess.

Yahew

who is the old woman?

pixelburp

Yahew wrote: »

who is the old woman?

She was in episode 1 of season 5; she was Amy's auntie, who was taking care of her while Amy's parents apparently didn't exist. She was played by Annette Crosbie, recognisable to people for playing Victor Meldrew's long-suffering wife in One Foot in the Grave.

Yahew

Really? I thought we never saw the auntie - must go back and have a look. Ta.

Yeah, I thought she was a neighbour and "her good looking one" son, was just a friend?

jim-jam

BaconZombie wrote: »

I don't belieeeeeve it! (:o)

nicowa

ixoy wrote: »

Great episode - many questions answered, more poised. I love the fact that there's so much more to debate now rather than just how loud was that Slitheen's fart that was left to us in RTD's era.
Interesting theories here and I'm also of the belief there's more to Lorna, although she may not be Jenny. The Doctor's going to meet here at some point again, as a child but he can't just offer her fish fingers and custard knowing what's in store for her.

I think the point of Lorna and the others who turned up to help the Doctor here was to show that there are other people out there who the Doctor helps and sometimes (I'm guessing here) it doesn't always go from bad to worse to better. Sometimes it just goes from bad to better and no one gets hurt. And also to show that we only see a fraction of what the Doctor does.

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Really enjoyed that episode. Just to add a further thought to the jumble:

We've seen that Rory had a/the sonic screwdriver for a good chunk of this episode, and we saw the look of incredible pity River gave him at the beginning of the episode, and that that seemed to be her first meeting with him. Is he going to die for real?

I didn't think that was a look of pity. I thought it was a look of "OMG my dad's here and (possibly) it's the youngest I've ever seen him and he looks really good and it's my BIRTHDAY!" And I thought that the second time as much (ok, a bit more) than the first time watching. Though possibly you meant the second look just before she gets into the cell in which case I'd understand pity cos she knows he's about to find his daughter and lose her again.

Yahew wrote: »

The reason to not kill hitler is that the solution is worse - possibly a nuclear armed Germany in 1950, still militaristic and antagonistic to the Soviets and the West, letting a few go off.

No, the reason (in a world without Doctor Who) that you can't go back in time and kill Hitler before he does what he does is the same old paradox. You can't go back and kill him because once you do the reason you did is moot and you didn't go back and kill him and then he's alive.... and so on and so on.

And on the old woman - it's the neighbour. We saw the auntie in The Big Bang when young Amy does her painting of the moon and stars and they explain to her that there are no stars. The aunt is a young woman with dark hair. And I'd guess that it's a costume dept thing rather than a Moffet thing. But I could be wrong.

MrVestek

nicowa wrote: »

The aunt is a young woman with dark hair. And I'd guess that it's a costume dept thing rather than a Moffet thing. But I could be wrong.

The rational side of my brain wants to believe you but then the fanboyish side says 'but what about the missing jacket in the angels story?! AAAAHHHHH!!!, it could be Moffat messing with us again!'

Stupid brain...

Yahew

No, the reason (in a world without Doctor Who) that you can't go back in time and kill Hitler before he does what he does is the same old paradox. You can't go back and kill him because once you do the reason you did is moot and you didn't go back and kill him and then he's alive.... and so on and so on.

Well I am talking about the Doctor Who world where he can change time, and stands outside time to a large extent; and has averted disasters on Earth before. He seems to get to decide the timeline that the Earth follows.

My ideas on why he wouldn't end up killing hitler would be that the alternative would be worse, I'd be surprised if that were not the theme of the show.

MrVestek

Yahew wrote: »

Well I am talking about the Doctor Who world where he can change time, and stands outside time to a large extent; and has averted disasters on Earth before. He seems to get to decide the timeline that the Earth follows.

My ideas on why he wouldn't end up killing hitler would be that the alternative would be worse, I'd be surprised if that were not the theme of the show.

Like Quantum Leap though when things get resolved our previous history seems to remain intact to follow the timeline of the 'real world' so to speak...

In Quantum Leap for instance both kennedys were shot and killed on that day but due to Sam's intervention only the president ended up being killed.

Doctor Who seems to follow a similar ethos.