The Amy and Rory ending is such peak Moffat nonsense forced to make a bittersweet ending, I think it's best not to think how it works and just accept it.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Doctor Who Series 10 |OT| He's Back, and It's About Time
- Thread starter tomtom94
- Start date
The Amy and Rory ending is such peak Moffat nonsense forced to make a bittersweet ending, I think it's best not to think how it works and just accept it.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
This is kinda how Moffat works as a writer, really, which normally isn't bad: He writes his episodes like they're mini-movies, and he apparently thinks that these movies will be watched once, and that'll pretty much be it.
So he hopes and endeavors that the emotionality of what he's writing will be overwhelming/overpowering enough that your brain (and your heart) just skips over the logistics (and their holes) and treasures the satisfaction delivered.
But it is a TV show, and his hit/miss ratio on blinding emotional impact is way closer to 50/50 than it is 70/30 or 80/20, so you end up with a guy basically leaving in narrative shortcuts where paying attention very carefully, and repeated viewings, are going to highlight those holes a lot more harshly than if viewed as he hopefully intended: Just the once, while being very open to emotional manipulation.
davidcotton
Member
The classic series once had a 4th doctor episode joke that he barely scraped through regeneration classes in the academy on Gallifrey, and that was why his were so wild and variable.
Exactly, episodes like Wedding of River Song seem amazing first viewing (at least to me) and then don't hold up at all on repeat viewings. That's usually the second part of the finale, Eleventh Hour, Pandorica Opens, Listen, etc are still great.
No, because the whole plot point of that was the angels had trapped them inside that hotel and they'd never be able to leave.
Which is what makes the fact they published a book so non-sensical.
What? No. They weren't trapped in the hotel.
They were trapped in time, not space. Theoretically they could travel the entire world but still be trapped in that year. I don't think it was even hinted at that they couldn't leave the hotel.
Amy didn't even get snatched in the hotel. I have no idea where he got that idea.
Oh come on. I hadn't seen any spoilers, and I'd been wondering who they'd get to play him since about half way through the previous episode. Not saying that new Who is a bit predictable at times or anything...
Honestly, this was my takeaway to some extent. Simm and Gomez were just such a delight together that I really wish the episode had been more about them as the antagonists and less about the Cybermen. Simm in particular felt like the Master in a way that he hadn't in his previous appearances, and I really wanted a chance to see him and 12 go head-to-head.
I think their ending in the episode was pitch-perfect, I just wish it hadn't happened now, basically.
They weren't trapped inside the hotel.
I'm not too sure that's accurate, either.
She did get snatched later on, though that was by choice to be with Rory, and it was to be trapped in a certain year, not a certain place. And even then they weren't exactly 'trapped' in time, as they lead a happy life and died old together.
I know, that's why I said she wasn't snatched in the hotel. She got snatched in the graveyard.
Pagusas
Elden Member
Just to add on to what everyone else is saying, not only were the not trapped, they adopted a son and raised him.
https://youtu.be/XWU6XL9xI4k
They lived out good long lives.
SlipperyFishes
Banned
And in Angel lore the reason you can't leave is because the Angels leech off your potential energy from the life you would have lived.
The paradox that they originally landed in back in the 40s made travel to NYC impossible. Therefore they couldn't be saved after the graveyard happened because no matter what they would always have died in NYC. Why?
That was a fixed point in time and he couldn't go back and change history without creating a new, worse paradox.
All that being said I can't figure out who the fuck Orson Pink came from. It was inferred to be Clara and Danny, but come on.
That was the inference when that episode first aired, but Danny died shortly after and Clara in the next season. The explanation Moffat gave afterward is that Orson was descended from another branch in Danny's family, and that Clara gave them the toy soldier. So it's either that, or Danny impregnated Clara before his death, and then she gave birth to and promptly gave up his child off screen.
Ugh. This is one of several reasons I do not like any of the Clara and Danny stuff and a lot surrounding it. I didn't really get the hate Moffat got until after all of this stuff happen. I'm okay with a good part of that season. The Danny/Clara stuff is my least liked parts of it. How it's ended and the plot holes left because of it are annoying.
My fear is that the same is going to happen here with Nardole but at least this situation is easier to think of possibilities for how this is going to turn out. The Orson stuff just feels like it was forgot or straight up ignored.
Spectromixer
Member
Damnit, Moffat, and in the same season.
EvilRedEye
Member
Moffat's talked about leaving narrative gaps and stuff for Big Finish etc. which makes me wonder if he's tended to try to be considerate of future creators when he comes up with plots. I've always wondered if that plot hole in Angels in Manhattan was deliberate so Amy and Rory could be dragged out for the 75th Anniversary or whatever if needs be.
For similar reasons I feel it's no co-incidence that youngest Doctor ever Matt Smith aged to death in his regeneration story.
For similar reasons I feel it's no co-incidence that youngest Doctor ever Matt Smith aged to death in his regeneration story.
Actually, no.
The angel touched Rory in the graveyard, he was sent back in time but he didn't go to the hotel that the angels were using to harvest people for food stuff earlier. He ended up back in time free of any angels around him, Amy let herself be touched and sent back to the same time.
She then went to Nixon whom they had met earlier and was able to get a new life set up and she wrote books. They lived a long life together, unfortunately due to the whole angel time thingee the Doctor could not go back to get them without causing a time paradox of some sort.
But hey at least they didn't get brutally killed so they sorta had a happy ending with a long life together.
It isn't like a future iteration of the Doctor couldn't bump into them on a New York City street in some sort of random throwaway cameo.
Probably.
But considering how often time gets rewritten with past invasions, first contacts, and when people go to the Moon, Mars or discover Atlantis it's safe to say that history is pretty fluid. I've often wondered if that meant various past histories have branched off into their own realities along with past companions who may or may not even have existed any longer in a new time line.
Regarding the time distortion in New York City, the Doctor was shown to be trying to fix that in The Return of Doctor Mysterio. But since Grant swallowed the Hazandra that the Doctor needed to fix the time distortion, I guess that never happened, but it showed that it could indeed be fixed somehow, at least. That also makes me wonder if the Doctor was trying to see Amy again in that episode, coming right after The Husbands of River Song and all...
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
My kids have decided to binge watch all of My who,and they have watched most of season 1.
Myb8byearvold likes it tons better than Seasonal 10. His reason? No twists.
Myb8byearvold likes it tons better than Seasonal 10. His reason? No twists.
If Moff is wrapping up his run, it's likely that Amy will play some role in the Christmas episode. I mean Moff wrote a loophole in that we never saw Matt Smith's Doctor specifically telling the stories to little Amy.
APZonerunner
Member
Well, in terms of the Smith story they've already had a compilation novel that's a couple of hundred years of him on Trenzalore, fighting and aging with no TARDIS, ha. I'm sure that period will be mined some more, but not that much - because he can't leave, a big chunk of what makes Doctor Who what it is is gone... you can only tell so many siege stories. There are large periods such as between Series 6 and 7 where an undisclosed amount of time passes where he's alone, allowing for fresh companions and stuff, and I bet that's where most of the Smith era's stories will fall.
Speaking of Moffat and leaving gaps though, I was surprised and disappointed to see that he specifically put in the line of "the last time I saw you..." from the Doctor to Simm's Master. It specifically makes clear he hasn't seen him since The End of Time, which rules out him appearing with Smith in Big Finish which is a bit of a shame. Alas.
acheron_xl
Member
What, you don't think that Clara and Me will take their space diner to Trenzalore?
Moffat said basically he left it open enough that they could bring Bill back if they wanted to.
Looks like she's not coming back though.
APZonerunner
Member
I try to forget that shit ever happened tbh
WrenchNinja
Member
Bummed that Bill and and Nardole are getting dumped
firehawk12
Subete no aware
Surely he must come back, because that ending for him is kind of unresolved unless we are just to believe everyone on the ship will become a cyberman.
The First Doctor seemed like the type to fight regeneration - it actually surprised me that Twelve is the same. When they shot that very first regeneration scene, did they even have a name of it yet (regeneration) because I love the idea of the doctor refusing the loose his first face, his identity but then every incarnation since has embraced the act of regeneration even if they didn't want to change. Twelve really seems adamant about dying rather than regenerating though.
Interestingly, I had a long conversation with some friends the other day about another popular UK property - James Bond. I've always compared the two for being long running series which replace their titular characters actor - albeit in different ways. The Doctor is always, technically, the same character but changed his face in lieu of death; sacrificing who he is at that moment but continuing to do what the doctor does. While Bond is more ambiguous, different spies of different eras, given the same code (007) and I've always always assumed that they took on the moniker of 'James Bond' as their alias. But i suppose this is less likely and we're just seeing the same character (James Bond) played by different actors to tell unique stories and its not nearly as complex as my mind thought.
Kanhir
Member
They didn't actually name it, or even present it as a consistent phenomenon, until the third regeneration.
The first regeneration (Hartnell to Troughton) was called "change and renewal", because he was getting too old. It was established as a function of the TARDIS, I suppose de-ageing him when he would have otherwise died of old age.
The second regeneration was established as the Time Lords changing his appearance as part of his punishment, along with exile on Earth. He had the choice of a number of faces and said no to them all, so one got picked for him. He was very against the whole thing.
It was only during the third regeneration that it was actually named, and they always treated it as one incarnation coming to terms with his death and bowing out. They even poked fun at it during Romana's regeneration, when she treated it like trying on bodies in a dressing room before settling on one.
Then in nuWho, regenerations started getting violent (with the energy spray) and the Doctor started being resistant to the process instead of accepting it.
(I imagine the Sixth Doctor would have also strongly resisted regeneration, had Colin Baker come back for the scene.)
That's a nice idea, but I'm not comfortable that a page in a book is regarded as defining a fixed point - it's quite possible that the author is not a reliable narrator. Let's hope no-one writes a book about how Davros destroys the universe and shows the Doctor the last pages of it!
It's a book recounting memories, though. That's the thing.
No, it's a book recounting what the author claims are their memories. It's an interesting catch-22. The reason the Doc thinks he can't change it is because the author told him he didn't change it, but the author could be lying.
(Of course, that in turn raises questions about 'to what end'? Which has interesting potential implications about Amy's motives.)
(Not that I'm hypothesising that any of this is intended, mind you - I'm just trying to indicate that I'm not sure I would regard the book as as solid evidence as the storyline does)
This is only true until Day Of The Bond, where Dalton, Brosban and Craig face the darkest day in Bond's history.
Broken Joystick
At least you can talk. Who are you?
Especially when he also says "I can't keep on being somebody else".
Edit: Actually I just realized he's referring to the fact that he's always regenerating with this line, and not referring to the fact that he has the face of Caecilius.
acheron_xl
Member
Yeah, he was just quoting 10 there. But I don't see 12's resistance as vanity, more as frustration that he'll have to start from scratch. After all, this is the incarnation that nearly turned his lifelong frenemy.
Hot Coldman
Banned
10 was sad about his incarnation passing on. He knew it was a good look for him and resented being screwed out of it by fate and circumstance.
12 is sad about having to ever change. Look at him - he'd rather die forever. Hell he almost did, knowingly!
12 is sad about having to ever change. Look at him - he'd rather die forever. Hell he almost did, knowingly!
acheron_xl
Member
And also 12 is like a petulant teen. Throwing a tantrum because he doesn't want to go away seems perfectly in-character to me.
Similar threads
- Locked