Support NeoGAF

[Blader]

Because it failed to do so. The Moment couldn't force the War Doctor to make his choice, and the War Doctor chose to kill. Now he didn't. It's not hard to see it happening both ways.

Hell, in The Name of the Doctor, War tells Eleven that he did something in the name of sanity and peace. And this is inside the Doctor's time stream, where Clara is able to interact with the actual different incarnations of the Doctor. So the War Doctor, who should know he didn't do anything if he never did anything claims to have done something.

So it happens both ways. First he does kill, then he doesn't. And the elegance of the second is that it fits perfectly as if he never had.

The War Doctor doesn't know he never killed the Time Lords, though. From his perspective, he takes the Moment, is ready to use it, memory gets a little fuzzy, then suddenly he's in a new body with Gallifrey, the Time Lords, and Daleks all gone. From his perspective, he must have used the weapon, died in the process, and killed billions of people.

It's the same trick as The Impossible Astronaut: just as Eleven never died and it was the Tesselecta all along, Gallifrey never burned and was always hidden away unknown to everyone but Eleven circa DotD.

 

[RedShift]

I always thought the whole "Go back and fake everything so it looks like it still happens but it didn't" trick like the Tesselecta and this is a bit of an easy get out of deterministic time travel.

I like how in the actually really good fanfic Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality (reading it is my secret shame) Dumbledore comes out and says trying to pull this kind of trick with a time turner to save a friend who'd died ended up going horribly wrong and killing another friend. Otherwise you can get out of pretty much anything and you might as well not have deterministic time travel at all.

Then again I don't care about Who having really inconsistent time travel. It only really exists to get the characters to interesting places and to do anything the writer thinks will be interesting in the story, it doesn't have to be Primer.

 

[Five]

I liked the episode, but my theatre was packed with hecklers and RealD 3D gives me a headache, so it wasn't as enjoyable of an experience as it perhaps should have been.

Also, I wish there were other things to dress up as in the Who-Verse. When I go to a Harry Potter screening, I'll probably see a Belatrix, a Dobby, a Cho Chang and a Draco. When I go to Hobbit screening, there might be a Gandalf, a Legolas and a Kili. Last night, everybody had a sonic screwdriver, trench coat and scarf.

 

[Future Foundation]

Did you get the almost 25 minutes of straight trivia before the actual movie started? As in, the ticket said the movie would start at 7:31, but it didn't actually start til like 8.

Or was that just my theater?

Nope, I got that too. That was insanity, I was expecting to get hone at around 9 or so, I ended up getting home at around 11.


EDIT: As for reactions, Tennant got the biggest pop during the pre-titles sequence. Then Smith, then Piper. The multi-Doctor sequence got a nice hand (especially Eccleston), and they loved Capaldi and the Two Bakers.

 

[Ripclawe]

looking back at the new series before this everything takes on new meaning that the doctor and the universe is under the assumption he killed everyone when in fact he didn't, plus we know at the end he retires as a curator makes me smile.

 

[GameplayWhore]

looking back at the new series before this everything takes on new meaning that the doctor and the universe is under the assumption he killed everyone when in fact he didn't, plus we know at the end he retires as a curator makes me smile.

It's kind of like watching Fight Club, where you realize that everything you've seen before makes *more* sense with the given revelation. There are a whole wad of things that always left me unsettled here and there, like the Daleks not being entirely wiped out, Gallifrey sort of hanging around in a pocket universe before a destruction we never see, et al, and those kind of were wrapped up in a pretty satisfying package by this special.

 

[paradox121]

Then again I don't care about Who having really inconsistent time travel. It only really exists to get the characters to interesting places and to do anything the writer thinks will be interesting in the story, it doesn't have to be Primer.

Ha Primer. I remember having to get a pen and paper and draw a timeline before I felt satisfied with that movie. That's why I always find it weird when people accuse Moffat of 'complex time elements'. At most its a person from the future going back to the start of a story to change something.

looking back at the new series before this everything takes on new meaning that the doctor and the universe is under the assumption he killed everyone when in fact he didn't, plus we know at the end he retires as a curator makes me smile.

I was wondering about this earlier actually. Going back to all those times where Tennant had his mopey speeches about Gallifrey and killing everyone; will it make him look like a dummy, or will you actually feel worse for him?

 

[Hot Coldman]

Also, I wish there were other things to dress up as in the Who-Verse. When I go to a Harry Potter screening, I'll probably see a Belatrix, a Dobby, a Cho Chang and a Draco. When I go to Hobbit screening, there might be a Gandalf, a Legolas and a Kili. Last night, everybody had a sonic screwdriver, trench coat and scarf.

Well, there's at least 12 different costumes to use from the title character, so it just sounds like your audience was lazy.

 

[JoeM86]

Because it failed to do so. The Moment couldn't force the War Doctor to make his choice, and the War Doctor chose to kill. Now he didn't. It's not hard to see it happening both ways.

Hell, in The Name of the Doctor, War tells Eleven that he did something in the name of sanity and peace. And this is inside the Doctor's time stream, where Clara is able to interact with the actual different incarnations of the Doctor. So the War Doctor, who should know he didn't do anything if he never did anything claims to have done something.

So it happens both ways. First he does kill, then he doesn't. And the elegance of the second is that it fits perfectly as if he never had.

Not according to Moffat. According to him, the Doctor ALWAYS did this, and just didn't remember it

“So that was the story – of course he never did that, he couldn’t. He’s the Doctor – he’s the man who doesn’t do that. He’s defined by the fact that he doesn’t do that, whatever the cost, he will find another way. So it had to be the story of what really happened, that he’s forgotten. Of course he didn’t – he’s Doctor Who! He doesn’t do things like that!”
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s7/d...s-50th-gallifrey-zygons-and-billie-piper.html

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

Of course he didn’t – he’s Doctor Who! He doesn’t do things like that!”

 

[Bobby Roberts]

Well, there's at least 12 different costumes to use from the title character, so it just sounds like your audience was lazy.

There's also a ton of companions to work with there. And hell, people dress up as the TARDIS and Daleks at this point more than they dress up than the Doctors, if con photography is anything to go by.

edit: read earlier that Moffat tried to run his story by RTD before it was shot, and RTD stopped himself from finishing it for fear of spoilers.

Curious to see what he thinks now that he's actually seen it, and whether or not he wishes he'd finished that reading now.

 

[mclem]

Because it failed to do so. The Moment couldn't force the War Doctor to make his choice, and the War Doctor chose to kill. Now he didn't. It's not hard to see it happening both ways.

How did it? What was different? I can't see any way this couldn't have been executed in exactly the same way.

Hell, in The Name of the Doctor, War tells Eleven that he did something in the name of sanity and peace. And this is inside the Doctor's time stream, where Clara is able to interact with the actual different incarnations of the Doctor. So the War Doctor, who should know he didn't do anything if he never did anything claims to have done something.

I took the final scenes in the timestream to be some sort of existential limbo; it wasn't a clearly-defined part of time like the other times she appeared, it was a void, with - I believe - the *memories* of the Doctor around. And the *memory* of the War Doctor was the regretful one.

 

[Jest Chillin]

Because it failed to do so. The Moment couldn't force the War Doctor to make his choice, and the War Doctor chose to kill. Now he didn't. It's not hard to see it happening both ways.

Hell, in The Name of the Doctor, War tells Eleven that he did something in the name of sanity and peace. And this is inside the Doctor's time stream, where Clara is able to interact with the actual different incarnations of the Doctor. So the War Doctor, who should know he didn't do anything if he never did anything claims to have done something.

So it happens both ways. First he does kill, then he doesn't. And the elegance of the second is that it fits perfectly as if he never had.

Setting aside that there is no evidence that The Moment failed at anything... How exactly could The Moment fail? The Moment is still The Moment with a conscience and The War Doctor is still The War Doctor, with the exact same personality. In order for the event to play out differently despite the exact same variables, the choice would have to be random. And there's no way that I believe that any incarnation of The Doctor would randomly choose yes or no to destroying two entire civilizations.

Now your interpretation of The War Doctor's words in The Name of the Doctor is really taking a strong literal interpretation on what can only be a symbolic scene. The War Doctor scene where 11 meets Clara can not be a literal moment from 11's life no matter what.

In the mystery location of the Time Stream that Clara lands, she sees multiple incarnations of The Doctor in that single place. If that location was a real time period in The Doctors life that she was reliving.. how were all those Doctors there at once? There's only one period of time where The War Doctor existed with other Doctors and we saw that in Day of the Doctor. The scene from Name of the Doctor could not have happened during that time.

The place that they are standing inside the Time Stream resembles Gallifrey during a time of war. But it can't be Gallifrey if Gallifrey is destroyed. If Gallifrey isn't destroyed yet, The War Doctor couldn't have known he destroyed it, right? So.. how does that work?

Okay, so let's say The War Doctor isn't standing on Gallifrey in The Name of the Doctor.. he's just standing on some other planet with some fires and a war like vibe going on. If The War Doctor had destroyed Gallifrey, he would still have regenerated immediately afterwards (the War Doctor generation was limited specifically to the period of The Time War) and we know from Day of the Doctor that when he saves Gallifrey, he regenerates before the TARDIS could even travel to another location. So he still could not have been standing anywhere after having destroyed Gallifrey.

Any way that you look at this, there's far more evidence for the entire event being circular... always happening the same way each time. You theory requires beliefs and interpretations that are more tenuous and have more gaps than the circular theory. And the circular theory has support in Moffats previous writing as well.

 

[mclem]

During the Making of thing at the end, there was applause for Colin Baker... control yourselves people...

One of the best Doctors.

Yes, really.

It sounds like the applauders know his work *beyond* the televised series.

 

[Fiktion]

How did it? What was different? I can't see any way this couldn't have been executed in exactly the same way.

It was a different timeline. Riddle me this, why would the War Doctor go on about the Moment showing him "exactly the future he needed to see" if there was only ever one possible future? It simply doesn't add up. He was shown the future where he killed everyone, which was what he needed to change course.

 

[mclem]

Last night, everybody had a sonic screwdriver, trench coat and scarf.

We had an Angel.

 

[mclem]

It was a different timeline. Riddle me this, why would the War Doctor go on about the Moment showing him "exactly the future he needed to see" if there was only ever one possible future? It simply doesn't add up. He was shown the future where he killed everyone, which was what he needed to change course.

Except the future where he killed everyone is indistinguishable from the future where he didn't.


As an aside, and counterexample: The painting that kicks everything off and resolves everything; "Gallifrey falls no more". #11 realises that Gallifrey was saved when he found out the true name - but it was named that *before* the events of this episode.

 

[BigWeather]

I am curious how the majority female viewership responds to Capaldi as he's a bit older and less cute than the last two. I expect he'll go over just fine. Really looking forward to the next season.

 

[Fiktion]

Except the future where he killed everyone is indistinguishable from the future where he didn't.

Sure, it had to be that way otherwise fans would riot at Series 1-6 being nullified. That doesn't change the fact that they were different futures. In one of them, Gallifrey is still out there. In the other, it isn't. That's all.

 

[Hot Coldman]

There's also a ton of companions to work with there. And hell, people dress up as the TARDIS and Daleks at this point more than they dress up than the Doctors, if con photography is anything to go by.

And if you can't

Spoiler

be arsed to

make a good costume, then there's always...

 

[Jest Chillin]

Sure, it had to be that way otherwise fans would riot at Series 1-6 being nullified. That doesn't change the fact that they were different futures. In one of them, Gallifrey is still out there. In the other, it isn't. That's all.

Fans will not riot and they would not riot. A few are miffed that what they thought had happened isn't really what happened but by and large people seem to be accepting it just fine. Hell Day of the Doctor takes place during the events on Journey's End. It's integrated quite well with the existing 1-6 series.

It's not a seperate timeline. It's not a changed event. It's a fixed moment in time that was always destined to repeat. It's just that we as the audience never saw it from this angle before. This is the first time we're seeing 11's point of view and we needed 11's point of view to know what really happened since he's the youngest Doctor who's memory isn't erased.

 

[BGBW]

When I do Doctor Who cosplay I dress up as an Auton that just so happens to look like me.

 

[Five]

We had an Angel.

That's rad! I wish I could have seen something like that.

 

[Fiktion]

Fans will not riot and they would not riot. A few are miffed that what they thought had happened isn't really what happened but by and large people seem to be accepting it just fine.

I don't think you understood what you were quoting there because your reply has nothing to do with what I was saying.

It's a fixed moment in time that was always destined to repeat.

This was never stated or even implied or hinted anywhere in the series! The only inevitability of the event was the belief that there was no other way, besides letting the Time Lords destroy all of creation. That has been the consistent portrayal since RTD.

 

[aHebrewMenagerie]

We had a Police Box outside our movie theatre.

 

[Jest Chillin]

This was never implied or even stated or hinted anywhere in the series! The only inevitability of the event was the belief that there was no other way, besides letting the Time Lords destroy all of creation.

Not every fixed event is known as a fixed event before it happens. Again, you have to consider the real options. The Doctor being The Doctor means he would never just stand idly by. The Doctor being The Doctor also means that The Moments Conscience would always win him over. The Time War being Time-Locked means that any attempt to change the event from the outside would likely fail. Dalek Caan is the only being to have purlled anything out of the timelock and he went insane for his troubles. Aside from that only The Moment is shown to have the power to invalidate the Time Lock so unless something evil gets it's hands on it, every sign points to everything being circular, aka a fixed event.

I don't think you understood what you were quoting there because your reply has nothing to do with what I was saying.

It's more a reply to your overall point than to the specific statement. The implication that these events must have changed previous history rather than previous history being "wrong" from the perspective of the viewer. The thing is, no matter how you slice it, your theory would be a retcon. Even if it's a neatly tied up retcon, it's a retcon nonetheless. And that would have fans more annoyed than the actual way it happened, which was a reveal.

 

[Fiktion]

Not every fixed event is known as a fixed event before it happens. Again, you have to consider the real options. The Doctor being The Doctor means he would never just stand idly by. The Doctor being The Doctor also means that The Moments Conscience would always win him over. The Time War being Time-Locked means that any attempt to change the event from the outside would likely fail. Dalek Caan is the only being to have purlled anything out of the timelock and he went insane for his troubles. Aside from that only The Moment is shown to have the power to invalidate the Time Lock so unless something evil gets it's hands on it, every sign points to everything being circular, aka a fixed event.

What? A fixed point is an event that can't be changed otherwise it'll destroy the universe a la The Wedding of River Song. The end of the Time War has never been portrayed as a fixed point, you're just confusing fixed points with time locks. Your argument is not supported by the text, it's just fan fiction.

 

[Jest Chillin]

What? This is nonsense. A fixed point is an event that can't be changed otherwise it'll destroy the universe a la The Wedding of River Song. The end of the Time War has never been portrayed as a fixed point, you're just confusing fixed points with time locks. Your argument is not supported by the text, it's just fan fiction.

What about The Day of the Doctor is different than The Impossible Astronaut/The Wedding of River Song? Because everyone else is making the connection that you're denying that the plotline of Series 6 is exactly how the plotline of Day of the Doctor unfolds.

The only difference between the two is that in The Wedding of River Song, Moffat specifically shows that if they change it, then all time happens at once and the Universe will eventually be destroyed. They didn't portray that The Day of the Doctor because there was no reason to. They had always made the right choice and the Doctor's suffering at the idea that he had made the wrong choice was necessary. It also stands to reason that he learned from the events in Series 6 and that's where the idea for saving Gallifrey came from, from the get go.

 

[Fiktion]

What about The Day of the Doctor is different than The Impossible Astronaut/The Wedding of River Song?

One dealt with a fixed point in time and showed the consequences of trying to mess with it. The other dealt with time being rewritten, with the Moment breaking the time lock long enough to summon 13 Doctors. They literally have nothing to do with each other. At all. People just want it to be wrapped up in a neat little predestination paradox and so they are torturing the text to fit their theories.

Again, you cannot show me anywhere in the series where it was stated that the end of the Time War was a fixed point. It's not there in the text. It's just not. No matter how much you want it to be, that is just not the case.

At some point, facts have to matter.

 

[Jest Chillin]

One dealt with a fixed point in time and showed the consequences of trying to mess with it. The other dealt with time being rewritten, with the Moment breaking the time lock long enough to summon 13 Doctors. They literally have nothing to do with each other. At all. People just want it to be wrapped up in a neat little predestination paradox and so they are torturing the text to fit their theories.

I'm pretty positive that they're both fixed points in time. The difference being that The Impossible Astronaut/The Wedding of River Song was centered around an event that The Doctor and Co didn't want to happen while The Day of the Doctor turns out to be centered around an event they did want to happen.

But, even if I'm wrong about it being a fixed event, we're collectively not wrong about the event having always happened the way we see it in Day of the Doctor. You must've missed this post earlier:

Not according to Moffat. According to him, the Doctor ALWAYS did this, and just didn't remember it

“So that was the story – of course he never did that, he couldn’t. He’s the Doctor – he’s the man who doesn’t do that. He’s defined by the fact that he doesn’t do that, whatever the cost, he will find another way. So it had to be the story of what really happened, that he’s forgotten. Of course he didn’t – he’s Doctor Who! He doesn’t do things like that!”
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s7/d...s-50th-gallifrey-zygons-and-billie-piper.html

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

In all seriousness, RTD must be pretty bummed.

 

[Fiktion]

I accept that Moffat quote as a fluid thing, because just as he overwrote RTD's intentions someone else might overwrite his just as easily. I believe that the cumulative text should be judged on its own and that the intention of the writers are secondary--that is the basis, after all, of literary scholarship.

But yeah it's still not a fixed point.

 

[Slowdive]

In all seriousness, RTD must be pretty bummed.

I'd like to know what he thinks for sure. I bet he loved it, honestly. Didn't he say he was always going to bring Gallifrey back for good down the line anyway if he stayed on?

 

[CorvoSol]

The War Doctor doesn't know he never killed the Time Lords, though. From his perspective, he takes the Moment, is ready to use it, memory gets a little fuzzy, then suddenly he's in a new body with Gallifrey, the Time Lords, and Daleks all gone. From his perspective, he must have used the weapon, died in the process, and killed billions of people.

It's the same trick as The Impossible Astronaut: just as Eleven never died and it was the Tesselecta all along, Gallifrey never burned and was always hidden away unknown to everyone but Eleven circa DotD.

That seems shaky at best to me, because his memory ends when he regenerates into Nine. The War Doctor is the ONLY Doctor who would know what he did with the Moment. He doesn't forget. Nine forgets. And it isn't Nine who tells Eleven that he used the Moment in the name of sanity and peace, it's War.


This discussion aside, I have a question that's been bugging me since I rewatched the show recently. The Angels Take Manhattan is a terrible episode full of terrible inconsistencies in its conclusion and I hate it forever, but in specific, how does it mesh with The Hungry Earth? In The Hungry Earth Amy and Rory see themselves in the future, waving at them. How does that happen if Amy and Rory are "trapped" in America before they were ever born?

 

[Hot Coldman]

The line of thinking behind RTD creating the Time War and the "destruction" of Gallifrey and the Time Lords was always more "all that shit is SUPER CONFUSING and everyone would be happier if it wasn't there to get in the way of our stripped down reboot", rather than "man, the Time Lords suck, fuck those guys".

I mean, it's obviously a little bit of the latter because they are the show's embodiment of nofunallowed.jpg, but that can always be improved. So I doubt RTD is gonna be fussed now that Who is well and truly accepted into the mainstream in all its glory once again. The time for the show to apologise for itself has passed, and I bet RTD would more than agree with that assertion.

 

[Jest Chillin]

Again, you cannot show me anywhere in the series where it was stated that the end of the Time War was a fixed point. It's not there in the text. It's just not. No matter how much you want it to be, that is just not the case.

At some point, facts have to matter.

I accept that Moffat quote as a fluid thing, because just as he overwrote RTD's intentions someone else might overwrite his just as easily. I believe that the cumulative text should be judged on its own and that the intention of the writers are secondary--that is the basis, after all, of literary scholarship.

But yeah it's still not a fixed point.

Facts are only facts in Doctor Who until they're revealed not to be facts. The show is knee deep in lore that keeps evolving and shifting and changing.

I'm fine with disagreeing with the event being a fixed point. You need it to be said explicitly, and that's ok. We'll see if it is said at explicitly at some point in the future.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

I see the Time Lords faults as potential interesting plotpoints.

 

[Exterminieren]

I seriously doubt RTD ever thought that the Time Lords would be gone forever. It was the right decision for the Doctor's journey when the show restarted, but I'd be surprised if RTD was too put out that Moffat changed it up. I rather suspect he just enjoyed the show.

This discussion aside, I have a question that's been bugging me since I rewatched the show recently. The Angels Take Manhattan is a terrible episode full of terrible inconsistencies in its conclusion and I hate it forever, but in specific, how does it mesh with The Hungry Earth? In The Hungry Earth Amy and Rory see themselves in the future, waving at them. How does that happen if Amy and Rory are "trapped" in America before they were ever born?

The universe was rebooted afterwards. It probably got rewritten, particularly considering that we saw Rory get wiped from the hillside after he got cracked.

Alternatively, the Doctor took them to stand and wave on the hill at some unspecified point later.

 

[firehawk12]

Our university has this thing where a canon in the center of campus gets repainted every day, and this was what it was yesterday:

 

[Blader]

That seems shaky at best to me, because his memory ends when he regenerates into Nine. The War Doctor is the ONLY Doctor who would know what he did with the Moment. He doesn't forget. Nine forgets. And it isn't Nine who tells Eleven that he used the Moment in the name of sanity and peace, it's War.

War Doctor forgets everything from meeting Ten/Eleven and onward. That's the whole point of the out-of-sync timelines, that the past Doctors never remember meeting each other or what happens after. So from Hurt's perspective, he brings the Moment to the cabin, is ready to use it, insert fuzzy memory here, suddenly he's regenerated into Nine and Gallifrey is gone.

Remember that the War Doctor who tells Eleven "what I did, I did for sanity and peace" wasn't the real War, it was - to use Inception lingo - Eleven's projection of him, based on what he remembers happening at the end of the Time War. As far as Eleven knew/remembered at that point, he destroyed Gallifrey as the War Doctor.

This discussion aside, I have a question that's been bugging me since I rewatched the show recently. The Angels Take Manhattan is a terrible episode full of terrible inconsistencies in its conclusion and I hate it forever, but in specific, how does it mesh with The Hungry Earth? In The Hungry Earth Amy and Rory see themselves in the future, waving at them. How does that happen if Amy and Rory are "trapped" in America before they were ever born?

New universe.

 

[maharg]

What? A fixed point is an event that can't be changed otherwise it'll destroy the universe a la The Wedding of River Song. The end of the Time War has never been portrayed as a fixed point, you're just confusing fixed points with time locks. Your argument is not supported by the text, it's just fan fiction.

Though it's never outright stated, it seems a bit ridiculous to consider the destruction, apparent or otherwise, of the two primary time travelling species in the universe, as well as the timelocking of their war that reached every corner of time and space, to be anything but a fixed point as the text has established it. The ramifications of their removal from history are deeply embedded into the universe itself.

That aside, the text does not in any way support a reading that the time lords and daleks were ever destroyed by the Moment. There is literally nothing there. It's not necessary to the story for it to have happened and we literally see the events leading up to it not happening and then it not happening. We also see the reason the Doctor believed it to have happened even though he himself didn't do it.

You don't need a quote from Moffat to see this, it's written in plain text and requires fan fiction-like twisting to make it happen.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

I'd like to know what he thinks for sure. I bet he loved it, honestly. Didn't he say he was always going to bring Gallifrey back for good down the line anyway if he stayed on?

If he did, then yeah, he's probably really happy with how Moffat did it, especially since he managed to do while introducing TWO new doctors at the same time, as well as giving the Doctor a far-off ending that is a lovely little retirement, whenever he gets around to it.

 

[Broken Joystick]

I really like this little theory on who The Curator actually was http://www.doctorwhotv.co.uk/who-is-tom-bakers-curator-56219.htm

 

[WyndhamPrice]

I really like this little theory on who The Curator actually was http://www.doctorwhotv.co.uk/who-is-tom-bakers-curator-56219.htm

But... there shouldn't be any question about this, right? In The Curator's dialogue he very clearly implied that he is The Doctor some x amount of regenerations from now having taken the face of "an old favorite" for fun. Why is it so hard to just trust that?

 

[WrenchNinja]

I really like this little theory on who The Curator actually was http://www.doctorwhotv.co.uk/who-is-tom-bakers-curator-56219.htm

Then where did the painting s come from?

 

[Bobby Roberts]

The episode also takes care to point out that the Doctor's been appointed the job of Curator BY Elizabeth I.

He takes the job when he's done being the Doctor. He's The Curator at that point.

Maybe someone else is "The Doctor" at that point.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

Most of the fan pieces on Doctor Who TV tend to be over-contrived "Ash was in a coma" nonsense. In my personal experience anyway.

 

[SpudBud]

I thought the episode was pretty straight forward on who the Curator was.

 

[catabarez]

Guys it's the Master for reasons.

 

[IdreamofHIME]

Watched it again, that Dick Van Dyke line is amazing. Poor Tennant, brilliant actor...terrible at accents.