Who?
They were too scared of the time energy thing consuming them, in order to concentrate fully on Amy.
They were too scared of the time energy thing consuming them, in order to concentrate fully on Amy.
-
-
Who?
Phoebe wrote:
Ah OK, good, good.They were too scared of the time energy thing consuming them, in order to concentrate fully on Amy.Comment
-
Who?
The casting of Matt Smith is starting to look like the most inspired piece of casting since...well, since the casting of Tom Baker as Doctor Who, actually. And yet, I can now quite believe Steven Moffatt when he says that it was the easiest decision he ever made. The guy is incredibly good.Comment
-
Who?
I loved that.Comment
-
Who?
Absolutely superb.
The other day, Mrs E was saying she thought Matt Smith was the best of the New Who doctors, and before I really knew what I was saying I blurted out "Ah, he's up there with Tom Baker". And then I thought "Hang on, you can't say that."
I'm still trying to keep my feet on the ground, but, well, I'm not sure I was wrong.Comment
-
Who?
My only quibble is this: the Weeping Angel concept has been watered down quite a bit. There was a lovely Copenhagen-Interpretationiness about the original idea of the "quantum lock". But it only works if they stabilise when they're observed; it doesn't work if they stabilise when they only think they're observed.
It was a necessary plot device, and it was also probably the scariest scene this series, so the whole thing was probably a net gain, but still...Comment
-
Who?
Pamela pointed out the bit that jarred a little for us. You saw the angels heads move. That makes them a lot less scary for the audience - until then we had the same view of them as thet did. Also aren't the angels supposed to only look like angels when they can be seen? A minor beef I know, but unlike the quantum lock thing, I don't think it added anything, only took it away.Comment
-
Who?
Yes totally, I was really hoping they weren't going to show them move, but it was OK in the end.
I kind of don't really want the whole thing to go down the road of involving her fiance & his friends & so on in every story. But it probably is going to, isn't it.Comment
-
Who?
My guess is "Yes, but probably in quite a subversive way".Comment
-
Who?
No no nononono! You only do that - the constant questioning - if you are really into someone. The actual bedroom scene didn't really ring true - she's idolised him since she was little, &c - and delicious though it was I don't really think she'd be confident enough to do that. Unless she was very drunk, or it's part of the plot that we'll find out about next week.we've seen enough with Amy's teasing about River to know that she's not in love with him, it's just sheer lust - she's getting married in the morning, and this is her only chance to ever fuck an alien.Comment
-
Who?
I thought it rang perfectly true and was completely in character. Amy was a difficult child and has grown up beauitful, standsto reason she should be sexually precocious and somewhat forward and manipulative. It's a function of her insecurity in other areas of life as much as her sexual confidence. And yeah, you'd ask loads of questions if you were that into someone - but you'd also ask quite a few if he was an alien who'd taken you into outer space and shown you a million things you don't understand.
Terrific double-parter anyway. Smith continues to be excellent and his doctor much more doctory, I liked the way the series arc is shaping up, and I liked so many of the little things too, snippets of dialogue and other plot contrivances like Angel Bob which was very well done. Super stuff.Comment
-
Who?
Actually I had forgotten the kissogram thing, so maybe you're right. I find it hard to relate to insecurity going along with sexual confidence, but that's not to say it's not plausible nonetheless. And I was responding to what Phoebe said specifically about her asking about River in case I didn't make that clear.
I liked the way the vampire corpse in the trailer looked just like they'd taken one of the nastier-faced angels & sprayed it black. Good old BBC. Was it on here that I was talking to someone about dreams about the props dept recycling Dr Who stuff, ages ago.Comment
-
Who?
Lyra wrote:
You and me both, but don't go thinking I've forgotten about our still-to-be-arranged date in a bus shelter, sometime.I find it hard to relate to insecurity going along with sexual confidence,
Fair point on the questioning thing then, I had indeed misunderstood. Still not sure I agree though, the girls who show most interest / curiosity in my sex life are generally friends who have no interest in me themselves but seem determined to mother me or set me up with someone else.
The kissagram thing fits too yeah, but I didn't mention it because I didn't want to be construed as implying that kissagrams are all slappers.Comment
-
Who?
hehehe. yes, indeed.
& I have to admit I have done this, when I have liked someone, I have gone out of my way to ask questions about other women to reassure them that they don't have to worry that I think they like me back, or other insane variations on that theme.
& re kissagrams, I just meant you have to be confident in your attractiveness to do it! (Does anyone still do that? Or is it all hiring proper strippers nowadays? It sounded endearingly old-fashioned.)Comment
-
Who?
Lyra wrote:
I won't be surprised to find that this was just you. Only you would send signals out that say that that you like someone, you want them to not let you know that they like you back.& I have to admit I have done this, when I have liked someone, I have gone out of my way to ask questions about other women to reassure them that they don't have to worry that I think they like me back, or other insane variations on that theme.
(That reads 1000 times harsher than I mean it, btw)
It depends whether you're a flattering type of kissogram or not, to be honest. My next door neighbour was a kissogram for years, and she did it fully in the knowledge that she looked as "rough as fuck" (her words, not mine).& re kissagrams, I just meant you have to be confident in your attractiveness to do it! (Does anyone still do that? Or is it all hiring proper strippers nowadays? It sounded endearingly old-fashioned.)
And yeah, kissograms are still going - they're there to "embarrass" the person whose birthday/stag night/celebration it is. Strippers are there for titillation.Comment
-
Who?
Now she's got me wondering if some of these girls who I thought weren't interested were actually trying to get me in the sack after all.
Shall we start talking about Dr Who again?Comment
-
Who?
Of course they were!
"you want them to not let you know that they like you back." Not that, rather that it is better that they realise that I realise they don't, because if they know that then they feel more comfortable and don't have to go to trouble to make it clear. or something.
Anyway yes, Dr Who. Erm.Comment
-
Who?
Yep, another addition to the 'very good' vote from this quarter. So good that it had me wearing a goofy grin of pleasure on my mug for pretty much the entire running time - tense, funny and thrilling. Matt Smith is much better than David Tennant. And Tennant was good.
I'm saying 'good' far more than is necessary. If the rest of the series maintains this standard for its remaining run, then I'll be a happy bunny.
Ten out of ten.Comment
-
Who?
An absolutely astoundingly good episode which left me breathless at times. Just so much crammed in to it yet none of it felt superfluous and cluttered. I am going to have to rewatch 'Coupling' again once this series of Who ends because little things Moffat does keep reminding me of it.
Anyway, one minor angel related quibble, if they look at each other then they're frozen forever, no? That's how The Doctor got rid of them in 'Blink' so how come they seemed to be looking at each other quite a lot is this episode?
Oh, and I can't understand why they were killing people not zapping them back in time or how the Angel Bob thing was justified.Comment
-
Who?
I've a feeling our various Angel-related quibbles might add up to something for Mad Larry to get his teeth into. I might not read it, though, because it would totally harsh my buzz at this time.Comment
-
Who?
Harry Truscott wrote:
Only for as long as there's light on.Anyway, one minor angel related quibble, if they look at each other then they're frozen forever, no?
Dunno. Up to them I guess. Humans don't all behave the same way either.Oh, and I can't understand why they were killing people not zapping them back in time
I thought that worked very well, simple plot device to allow them to communicate, but that he was still being suitably deferential to his superiors, referring to his own experience of death and referring to the angels in the third person made you wonder how much of his own consciousness was still involved from whatever bits of his brain they were still using. Which made the fact that he was obligingly giving away more info than he probably needed to seem more plausible than it usually does in those situations.or how the Angel Bob thing was justified.Comment
-
-
Who?
Yoss wrote:
I agree it worked well but I don't recall the reason the angels kept part of Bob's consciousness "alive" at all.I thought that worked very well, simple plot device to allow them to communicate, but that he was still being suitably deferential to his superiors, referring to his own experience of death and referring to the angels in the third person made you wonder how much of his own consciousness was still involved from whatever bits of his brain they were still using. Which made the fact that he was obligingly giving away more info than he probably needed to seem more plausible than it usually does in those situations.or how the Angel Bob thing was justified.Comment
-
Who?
They may have had no choice, they couldn't communicate through him without doing so, or maybe it was to taunt the doctor at having failed to save him.Comment
-
Who?
Why did they want to communicate though? Unless it was just to taunt the Doctor.
I'm sure there was some explanation in the part one of the story but I think it was a bit "Will this do?".Comment
Comment