Who?

[Ray de Galles]

Who?

ad hoc wrote:

Shows how much Dr Who I've watched of late. 4 main characters? 4? What kind of insane inflation is this? Who are these characters? The Dr, his assistant and...? The tardis? the screwdriver? have they brought K9 back? The Dr has a posse now? What the fuck.

Grumble grumble modern world better in my day grumble moan

Jon's reference to "four main characters" was the first I have ever heard of the term and I presume it comes from the promo around this week's premiere which I have tended to avoid because of the risk of spoilers (especially since the first report I read revealed the fact there would be a death) specifically to set up the Whogetsit speculation.

River's been no more than a reoccurring special guest star before (though that's clearly to change this series) so this sudden talk of four is why I think she's for the chop.

Others here have infinitely better memories of the original show than me but the Tardis got pretty crowded (well, obviously not but you know what I mean) pretty regularly in the eighties didn't it?

[Houdi Elbow]

Who?

River Song. Because Alex Kingston presumably has the highest salary.

Andy, the Doctor has had more than one companion on several occasions.

[Jon]

Who?

Here is the Guardian article I read where it mentions that one of 4 characters will die.

"The programme's show runner Steven Moffat risked the ire of fans with a "spoiler" giving away that one of four characters – the Doctor, played by Matt Smith, his companion Amy Pond (Karen Gillan), her husband Rory Williams (Arthur Davill) or mysterious fellow time traveller River Song, played by former ER star Alex Kingston – will meet their doom."

I was immediately put in mind of Marvel Two-in-One issue 93 - 'And One Shall Die' - where one of either The Thing, Machine Man, Ultron or Jocasta actually dies.

That's a fairly common device in comics, isn't it? Trail a (supposedly) major death on the cover.

Yes, it is. And it's hoary to backside. A shame that Dr Who is going down this route. (I chose the Marvel Two-in-One issue over any others as, like Dr Who, it gives you a choice of 4 characters who might die. Usually you get 2. Although, in Dr Who, as in the Marvel comic, you can discount 2 of the characters straight away.) Oh, and JV is spot on - Jocasta dies. And he is also right that she comes back to life some 3 1/2 years later.

[Rogin the Armchair fan]

Who?

I think they're going to kill off the Doctor.

[David Agnew]

Who?

Irritatingly, the spoiler is splashed all over the front cover of the Doctor Who magazine, so it would be pretty tough to miss if you walked into a newsagents.

Harry Truscott wrote:

Have they specified it's "one of the 4 main characters dying" then? In which case odds on it's River which is annoying as I had thought it was sure we'd get rid of that plank Rory for good this time.

I'm hoping it's Rory too. And I'm hoping whoever cops it doesn't come back to life.

I'm guessing the "1 of 4" is so that they can have four magazine covers, and also use the same advertising for the states, where alex Kingston is much more well known.

[jason voorhees]

Who?

It's like in pro wrestling, how Jim Cornette (manager of the Midnight Express) would say how the statute of limitations on pro wrestling angles is 7 years.

[jason voorhees]

Who?

*********SEASON 3&4 SPOILERS*******

**_*)*)*)*()*()*()*)*)_*))**

*)**********************))*)*)*)*)*)

It's a little tricky, how both Rory and River Song are already dead. I mean, isn't Rory still a Dalek robot who somehow got Rory's conciousness ?

**************OVER**(************

[Purves Grundy]

Who?

Well, there's a photo of the Doctor, Amy & Rory all together in the pirate story, which is the third episode, in the latest DWM. And we know that River Song actually dies at the end of Forest of the Dead. So what we're probably looking at is one of Steven Moffat's paradox-based stories. And that's why I'm not getting too excited about the new series. I mean, I have of late lost all my mirth anyway, but frankly, the thought of a new series of Doctor Who is no longer enough to snap me out of it if it's just going to be more of the same.

[ursus arctos]

Who?

American wannabees.

[jason voorhees]

Who?

#36 has a long way to go until he reaches the levels that my 12-year-old self set. Until he goes to a Prydonians of Princeton meeting dressed in his mother's kilt that he put safety pins up too high, thus giving him a mini skirt in a room of the people you see in that picture, a rugby shirt with a bowtie and sonic screwdriver simply will not cut it.

[David Agnew]

Who?

Shockingly great review of the first episode in the Guardian, the highlights being:

"And neither will the big hype line that everyone's using: that this is the darkest series of Who in the history of time and space ... that description is not without warrant – as you can see from fabled new enemies The Silence ... They're disgusting to look at, and, while it would give the whole thing away to tell you what it is that they do, it truly is the stuff of nightmares."

"(highlight to reveal a spoiler)There's also the well-hyped revelation that one of the four leads will die. Again, it doesn't spoil much to reveal that this isn't a trick or a lie (It fucking does - DA): somebody dies, there's no sci-fi get-out clause, and that harrowing sequence looks as if it will shape the rest of the series. "

"Oh it's still wildly funny, and it its heart is proper, bonkers Doctor Who."

"Steven Moffat has said that the first episode, The Impossible Astronaut, should be regarded as dark only in terms of a series opener; they've flipped things so the climactic terror of a finale is served up first. Moffat understands better than most people working in television that children like to be frightened – he's a father of two himself."

"There is only one other thing I can tell you about The Impossible Astronaut: it is shockingly good. Seriously, it floors you from the off and doesn't let you go. The relentless pacing, the intricate serialised story arc, the established presence of a good-looking ensemble cast (all, by the way, having massively upped their games after last year) ... It's still as daft and British and Doctor Who as ever ... Doctor Who might now be one of the coolest, sexiest, smartest most stylish things on television. Honestly. On Saturday night you'll know what I mean."

Now I cannot wait.

[hobbes]

Who?

Well that was pretty good.

[Rogin the Armchair fan]

Who?

Rogin the Armchair Fan wrote:

I think they're going to kill off the Doctor.

I wish I was this good at predicting horse races.

I also wish they'd told us this was going to be a two-parter. I hate it when that happens. So is the girl in the space suit an infant River Song, or something?

The trailer for next week suggests Rory and Amy spend the episode scrawling things on themselves to remember the Silents (or is it the Silence?) are there, a bit like in that film with Mike out of Neighbours.

[Taylor]

Who?

I thought it was a bit of a mess myself. Seemed to wash over me, anyway.

[Purves Grundy]

Who?

That's so weird. I mean, apart from teh fact that I would gamble my life on Jason V thinking this story was the Best Thing Ever, I'd have thought you'd have loved that, Taylor. I mean, you loved Time of Angels, and I thought tonight was pretty much Moffat rewriting that one, but with the auto-pilot off.

Personally, I haven't anjoyed an episode of Doctor Who that much since Midnight.

I am, however, the worst parent in the world, as my kids were scared demented by this, even more than by Blink, so suggesting we play a game of "Climb the stairs in the dark", than saying "I'll just go into my bedroom and see if everything's ok", then leaving them unattended while I screeched and made sort of horror movie noises probably wasn't a good idea.

In fact, it was a demonstrably not good idea, the proof coming from the fact that Little Miss Grundy has only just stopped crying, over two hours later.

[Ray de Galles]

Who?

Rogin the Armchair Fan wrote:

Rogin the Armchair Fan wrote:

I think they're going to kill off the Doctor.

I wish I was this good at predicting horse races.

I also wish they'd told us this was going to be a two-parter. I hate it when that happens. So is the girl in the space suit an infant River Song, or something?

SPOILERS

I don't necessarily think that the Doctor's death tonight was the one that was being discussed in all the pre-series publicity though, oh and nearly everything I saw about the new series said it opened with a two-parter. I ratings terms alone, not to would be nuts.

I notice Alex Kingston wasn't in the opening credits so maybe I was wrong in the impression I got beforehand that she would be in the whole series with U's finding out who she actually is at the end of it.

Thoroughly good set-up episode tonight though, was hoping to introduce my 7 & 9 year old daughters to Who proper this series but there's no chance of that based on those new monsters.

[David Agnew]

Who?

Taylor wrote:

I thought it was a bit of a mess myself. Seemed to wash over me, anyway.

I don't like to rate two-parters after part one, just in case it falls apart like Daleks in Manhattan.

I thought the pacing of it was all over the place. It started very odd - why and when were Amy & Rory dropped off? Didn't they leave their village after the last series to travel the stars, and they got what? A doomed spaceship landing into a planet that looked like Victorian Britain? The Doctor tells them he's been running - maybe he needed to prepare them for something dangerous, or to show them that they can't rely on his ability to regenerate, and that he can really die, and that he's actually in the spacesuit in the beginning of the episode (after all, the 'now' Doctor didn't turn up at the rendez-vous, but at a nearby diner, and would fit into Moff's love of the paradox).

Then it all goes slow - too slow - as they set up the episode (even though we still don't really know what the episode is about), although we have had warnings about the Silence before (they took over the fish people's planet from the Vampire one last season, and the TARDIS-style console that Rory and River stumbled across appeared to be the same one in the one with James Corden). You could have cut 10-15 minutes out, and started with a movie-length opener. But then you wouldn't have the cliffhanger where it looks like Amy's killed a child (her own child? a young River Song? both? assuming she really is pregnant of course - River had the same stomach problem, and Rory wasn't overprotective about Amy at all, yet you'd expect him to be, so maybe the silence play with your mind in more ways that one), but as the child will almost certainly live - this is prime time BBC, after all - it might save the inevitable complaints.

Although, we have the Silence, and fucking hell, what great monsters they are. It's a magnificently simple, yet genius idea - like a lot of the monsters Moff creates.

Purves Grundy wrote:

I am, however, the worst parent in the world, as my kids were scared demented by this, even more than by Blink, so suggesting we play a game of "Climb the stairs in the dark", than saying "I'll just go into my bedroom and see if everything's ok", then leaving them unattended while I screeched and made sort of horror movie noises probably wasn't a good idea.

In fact, it was a demonstrably not good idea, the proof coming from the fact that Little Miss Grundy has only just stopped crying, over two hours later.

Hahaha. This is exactly why I would never have kids. Well not, that, just the resultant clean-up operation.

Harry Truscott wrote:

I don't necessarily think that the Doctor's death tonight was the one that was being discussed in all the pre-series publicity though, oh and nearly everything I saw about the new series said it opened with a two-parter. I ratings terms alone, not to would be nuts.

I hope you're right, unless this is one long story arc where they have a certain amount of time to save his life, and they don't manage it until the last episode.

I notice Alex Kingston wasn't in the opening credits so maybe I was wrong in the impression I got beforehand that she would be in the whole series with U's finding out who she actually is at the end of it.

1) She's never been in the opening credits.

2) We find out who she is (and you'll have to highlight this bit, as I found it out by accident, and I wish I didn't) at the end of the first block of episodes. It is apparently the cliffhanger to a two part episode where we have to wait three months for the revelation. My current guess is that she is that astronaut, as a) that's what we first saw her wearing in Silence In The Library, b) the last episode of the first block is allegedly called 'A Good Man Goes To War' and she is sent to prison for killing 'A Good Man', c) she stopped Amy intervening when the astronaut killed the Doctor - but that is FAR, FAR too obvious, isn't it? Or maybe this Canton if the Good Man that she kills - after all, we've only just met him, but the Doctor trusts him. More questions that answers. Which in some respects, is what it should be about.

[Ginger Yellow]

Who?

But then you wouldn't have the cliffhanger where it looks like Amy's killed a child (her own child? a young River Song? both? assuming she really is pregnant of course - River had the same stomach problem, and Rory wasn't overprotective about Amy at all, yet you'd expect him to be, so maybe the silence play with your mind in more ways that one),

Or, you know, maybe they impregnate people.

[Mumpo]

Who?

It was great telly, exactly the sort of thing that should be showing on Saturday nights, and in that respect, it's hard to offer up much in the way of criticism. However, it was overplotted (quelle surprise), overscripted (the quickfire wisecracks are starting to dominate the dialogue) and overperformed, especially from Smith, who needs to reign it in. And please, Steven Moffat, just for once, give us a base under siege, or some straightforward body mutation; this is like having your dinner cooked for you by Heston Blumenthal every night - eventually you get cravings for a plate of sausage and mash. Also, halfway through a two-series story arc is hardly the best place to have to introduce the whole of America to the Doctor Who mythos, but there you go.

[Mumpo]

Who?

Oh, and thankfully this was one of Murray Gold's better incidental scores. Though the sound cue used every time a character forgot about the Silence was far too exaggerated.

Character looks down corridor, sees Silence

Character turns back to look in room

SHOOOOMMF!

"No, there's no-one there"

etc.

[Ray de Galles]

Who?

David Agnew wrote:

I notice Alex Kingston wasn't in the opening credits so maybe I was wrong in the impression I got beforehand that she would be in the whole series with U's finding out who she actually is at the end of it.

1) She's never been in the opening credits.

No but I thought as she was being built up as a "fourth main character" for this entire series she would be.

I'll avoid the whited-out spoilers, thanks.

[Wyatt Earp]

Who?

Missed it while on holiday, and watched it tonight.

That was excellent.

[Taylor]

Who?

I'll have to watch this again, if I get time this week.

Just seemed like autopilot Moff to me - variations on past monsters and events; lots of 90s-sitcom wisecracking getting in the way of what's actually going on; bits that go too fast and bits that go too slow; set pieces which don't quite connect because they're going for "WTF???" but only manage "eh?"; a plot that's slightly too complex to develop naturally in 45 minutes (requiring a few unsubtle pushes) but simultaneously a bit nothingy. I love Moffat's writing at its best, but we've all seen enough of his stuff now to spot when he's coasting, or not feeling particularly inspired. Thought this was a prime example.

But yeah, it's a two-parter so maybe it'll all come together. Or, as with the two-part finale of last season, the second half will be a desperate jumble of timey-wimey nonsense which doesn't so much tie up the loose ends as blast them into oblivion, making you feel stupid for having attempted to predict a proper, satisfying resolution. Dunno.

At least it's a bit intriguing, though. Rather a coasting Moff than a coasting RTD.

[imp]

Who?

Ha, I finally get to join in on the Who threads now that BBC America is in sync, though my analyses are extra-superficial. I usually enjoy them, I always laugh at the one-liners, and I don't expect the plots to make much sense. In fact, I barely even bother trying to really follow them. I thought this was a great episode - funny, scary, imaginative.

Ian, aged 10.

[Crusoe]

Who?

I thought it was alright. I thought the Silence (now there's a name that makes me think of floppy-haired, fourteen-year-old friendly indie gludge) monsters were ace, but the plot just felt like a scattergun attempt. Lots of stuff thrown in, but not enough to judge whether it'll work. How good this story is depends on the second episode pulling the strings together, for me. The deeply portentous story arc stuff has been done and done and done and done and I would just like a seriously good one- or two-parter that doesn't depend on A Bigger Picture.