Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 

Author Topic: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan  (Read 11840 times)

Trout

  • Member
  • CALL-ME-KENNETH!
  • *****
  • Posts: 13486
  • "Because I hate you."
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #15 on: 29 September, 2012, 09:36:49 PM »

BPP

  • Member
  • Evil Cyborg
  • ****
  • Posts: 2020
    • View Profile
    • Futureshock'd: At least the pictures are nice.
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #16 on: 29 September, 2012, 09:38:30 PM »
The BAD -
Couldn't make head nor tails of it at all. Totally baffled.

The MIXED -
1 of us likes River, 1 of us can't abide her.

The GOOD -
Despite not understanding ANYTHING to do with Angels / Time / Fixed time / Why the Doctor can see young amy not 'we had a nice life' amy etc etc (got the Paradox bit okay)... it really DID know how to push the buttons.

 Overall - Matt Smith is much better than the scripts he's being given. Still hurrah and roll on Xmas Day.
If I'd known it was harmless I would have killed it myself.

http://futureshockd.wordpress.com/

http://twitter.com/#!/FutureShockd

SmallBlueThing

  • Member
  • Bionic Fingers
  • *****
  • Posts: 6003
  • Wants to eat you.
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #17 on: 29 September, 2012, 10:02:17 PM »
Fuck you moffat.

This is unworthy of you.

Please don't, Trout. And no, it isn't.

SBT
.

Danbell

  • Member
  • Page Numbering Droid
  • **
  • Posts: 100
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #18 on: 29 September, 2012, 10:08:32 PM »
why can't the ponds just wait a few years, leave New York, and then hook back up with the Doctor?


Leigh S

  • Member
  • Bionic Fingers
  • *****
  • Posts: 6391
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #19 on: 29 September, 2012, 10:12:29 PM »
Because he knows that Rory at least dies there, from the gravestone... so to take them away again would be another paradox which would be one too far... but why he cant nip in and say hello, I dont know - also, the rewriting tombstone seems to suggest Amy had already rewritten things, which made a bit of a mockery of it... would ahve been better if her name ahdnt appeared, and the Dr only knew she got back with Rory from the book...

But used to them not thinking these things through/changing the rules to suit the schmaltz by now!  Certainly the best this series... Mercy being the low point and Dinosaurs second best.

Leigh S

  • Member
  • Bionic Fingers
  • *****
  • Posts: 6391
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #20 on: 29 September, 2012, 10:13:51 PM »
Of course, he could also go back, whisk them off as per usual and drop them back in the appropriate time period that the gravestone would still be right...

Mardroid

  • Member
  • Bionic Fingers
  • *****
  • Posts: 6719
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #21 on: 29 September, 2012, 10:34:52 PM »
why he cant nip in and say hello, I dont know - also, the rewriting tombstone seems to suggest Amy had already rewritten things, which made a bit of a mockery of it...

I thought that too, but on thinking further, but then I remembered Amy stating to the Doctor that they could rewrite history, and he clarified that they couldn't if it involved something in their own timeline. I.e. in short, if you know your future you can't change it. Or actually you can, but it could result in a major paradox. And require a lot of energy to do so. (The power of love will do it tough apparently. Dear me, that's cheesy.)

Therefore changing other people's futures is fine. And since it's unlikely that she carved her name on the tombstone herself... that's somebody else's future - the stonemason's.

I'm sure there's a hole in that logic, but anyway.

I liked that episode a lot, although I was doing other things (cooking etc.) so missed the odd snippet here and there. Not as much as last week's episode where I actually fell asleep.

I'm not so sure of the sudden introduction of the idea that paradoxes will destroy angels, I guess that since these creatures are influenced by time, i.e. they eat it, and are quantum locked, it's not too much of a stretch. Just a bit out of nowhere. . Also, if these paradoxes are as potentially destructive as the Doctor feared, it seems a bit dodgy that the Ponds would commit suicide as they're risking a lot of other people as well. Of course it turned out all right (well, until it didn't. Great twist by the way.) but still,what a chance to take.

It was great to see the Angels back to their time guzzling selves. I didn't dislike the previous episode they were in, but I did dislike the fact that rule was dropped. (Okay it wasn't dropped, it was explained during the episode but to put away what seemed to be their modus operandi seemed a bit of a shame.)

Oh, and I still find the Weeping Angels scary, but then I had a fear of statues as a kid. (Silly I know.  I don't have that fear any more, but I remember it, and I still find those hard blank white eyes a bit unsettling. And yeah, those little cherubs. Brrr.) And they've only been in three episodes. That's not too many.

Oh and the Statue of Liberty. "You gotta be kidding me!" Heh.

DrJomster

  • Member
  • Posting Machine
  • ***
  • Posts: 1371
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #22 on: 29 September, 2012, 11:08:43 PM »
Blimey, just blimey.
The hippo has wisdom, respect the hippo.

Taryn Tailz

  • Member
  • Prog Stacking Droid
  • ***
  • Posts: 747
  • "Goth N Roll"
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #23 on: 29 September, 2012, 11:12:13 PM »
Apparantly the Melody Malone book (which was featured heavily in this episode) is actually going to be released.

http://www.doctorwhonews.net/2012/09/melody-malone-270912171508.html

M.I.K.

  • Member
  • Battle Hardened War Robot
  • ****
  • Posts: 3468
    • View Profile
    • Mal Comix
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #24 on: 29 September, 2012, 11:22:12 PM »
And to make it just that bit worse this week- kids heroes have to kill themselves to beat the badguys in children's programme. Fuck you moffat.

A horrible thing it may be, but there is absolutely nothing new about that 'noble sacrifice' guff in children's entertainment generally, or even Doctor Who specifically.

Bat King

  • Member
  • Battle Hardened War Robot
  • ****
  • Posts: 2813
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #25 on: 29 September, 2012, 11:26:59 PM »
I agree with what seems to be general concensus - thoroughly enjoyed this episode.

Not sure why people constantly question the fact little things don't always match up in Dr Who. Continuity in most tv shows is pants. It isn't always constant in 2000AD, and is non-existent in most DC or Marvel comics. Dr Who is fairly consistent, for a tv show... For one thing it is proven in many episodes that what we were told is a rule inothers isn't so. The Doctor is an unreliable narrator, that is consistent.

Trout

  • Member
  • CALL-ME-KENNETH!
  • *****
  • Posts: 13486
  • "Because I hate you."
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #26 on: 29 September, 2012, 11:27:22 PM »
And to make it just that bit worse this week- kids heroes have to kill themselves to beat the badguys in children's programme. Fuck you moffat.

A horrible thing it may be, but there is absolutely nothing new about that 'noble sacrifice' guff in children's entertainment generally, or even Doctor Who specifically.

Also it's not as simple as that. They spent a lifetime together.

SmallBlueThing

  • Member
  • Bionic Fingers
  • *****
  • Posts: 6003
  • Wants to eat you.
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #27 on: 29 September, 2012, 11:34:07 PM »
There certainly is something new in the blatant 'to beat monsters we must jump off a building'- this isn't 'i will stay behind and be blown up by the dalek bomb' or 'i'll wrestle the evil alien out of the airlock' or 'i'll get caught in the daleks time-destructor ray and age to death', this was prosaic suicide of the kind that hundreds of people do each year.

Look, i hate moffat's writing. Ive briefly met him and he was a smug, obnoxious twat before he got the dr who gig- grud knows what he's like now, but his work has become ugly and lazy and it has become horribly obvious dr who is something he writes when he takes a piss during sherlock storylining meetings. I would very much like him to stop writing it- and until he does, i think i'll just let the kids dictate whether we watch or not. And judging by this series, where they've not remembered it's been on once- that wont be often.

SBT
.

BPP

  • Member
  • Evil Cyborg
  • ****
  • Posts: 2020
    • View Profile
    • Futureshock'd: At least the pictures are nice.
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #28 on: 29 September, 2012, 11:34:21 PM »
I think the point is more 'hey kids you too can jump off high walls and be fine'. Which did strike me at the time of watching it but well, ya know.... no expert on kids here.
If I'd known it was harmless I would have killed it myself.

http://futureshockd.wordpress.com/

http://twitter.com/#!/FutureShockd

Radbacker

  • Member
  • Posting Machine
  • ***
  • Posts: 1810
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #29 on: 30 September, 2012, 08:01:53 AM »
 :'( snnnfff, scuse me something in my eye.

yes a tad over blowin score wise but a perfect ending to two of my favorite Nu Who companions, nearly overtaking Rose as fav of the new lot (sorry Billie Pipers cute little chipmunk cheeks get me everytime).
Abd those Baby Angels  :o

CU radbacker