Bio not provided
Couldn't agree more if I built a machine specifically to enhance my ability to agree with things. I love Sherlock. I also love Doctor Who. That's why I'd rather they were left to do their own thing in their own respective Universes, rather than being smashed together into some sort of pop culture Frankenstein monster. If you're going to make Wholock, you might as well set it in the Queen Vic and have Walter White, Rick Grimes and Ned Stark drop by to play Quidditch against The Simpsons. I just can't see the appeal. 90% of crossovers are terrible, and even the 10% that aren't never live up to the quality of their constituent parts. Let Doctor Who be Doctor Who and let Sherlock be Sherlock. There's nothing wrong with being a part of both fandoms, and there's nothing wrong with imagining what a crossover could be like - but let's just leave it a fantasy for everyone's sakes.
2 months, 1 week ago on Gatiss: I don’t see why people are so obsessed with ‘Wholock’
A-ha! Thankyou! I was wondering what it reminded me of, I just couldn't place it!
2 months, 1 week ago on Last Christmas Allegedly “Too scary” for Kids
Although part of me shares your sentiments about Christmas Specials, I must say I'd loathe a series of nothing but two-parters. To me, that's simply swinging from one extreme to the other. A good series of Who, in my opinion, needs variety. We need standalone, single episodes. We need multiple-part episodes (odd how rarely people suggest triple-bills as oppose to doubles; something akin to Utopia/TSoD/LotTL would be nice).But of course, there's also the small sliver of anti-Scrooge in me that would be a little bit saddened were the Christmas Special to go away (especially considering it's usually the only thing I take the time to watch on Christmas), even considering the hit-and-miss standards. Although the Autumn schedule would render it no different to any other episode, I've often thought a Halloween special would make a more interesting fit - but I won't be holding my breath. I think the BBC are much to fond of having DW be a staple of their Christmas line-up.
2 months, 1 week ago on The Christmas Conundrum
I'm giving this one to The Next Doctor. It's a tricky one though. There are aspects of The Next Doctor that I truly loathe (not least of them being the ridiculously huge steampunk Cyberking rampaging through Victorian London), but there are also elements that I thought were fantastic (such as Jackson Lake's fugue state). On the other hand, Voyage of the Damned never hit either extreme - there was nothing about it that I particularly loved, but likewise nothing to be hated. It was inoffensive; it was perfectly happy to sit calmly on the fence whilst The Next Doctor was leaping around screaming and shouting. Score-wise, they're both in and around 7/10 territory for me, so I've chosen between them on the grounds of which one pushed the boat out further and tried to be different - which nudges The Next Doctor slightly ahead. It was far from a perfect episode, but it felt like it tried slightly harder, even if the risks it took didn't all pay off.
2 months, 1 week ago on Festive Face-Off: Voyage of the Damned vs The Next Doctor
You don't do much to boost my excitement by comparing it to Robots of Sherwood... :(
A Christmas Carol was the best we've had, IMO; it was festive, it was dark, it was emotional, it was timey-wimey, it was clever, it was silly... it absolutely found every single sweet spot. I'm actually rather flabbergasted (I love that word) that the author feels the plot came second to the festivity and cheerfulness - I'd say that, despite the obviously Christmas-inspired setting, words like "festive" and "cheerful" aren't ones I'd readily associate with A Christmas Carol. It was a story about a lonely old miser willing to let hundreds of people die at Christmas due to his dark, soured childhood with an abusive father and the repeated misguided interventions of a time traveller. That's not a synopsis that makes me feel cheery in the slightest.
I'm not sure about your first statement. I find that good character development (in Who particularly) tends to a) come in 'arcs' (i.e. slow build over time) and b) come from having the right characters to play against (people don't tend to discover themselves alone, so much as learn who they are in relation to those around them). I think it'd feel too incremental and possibly disjointed if the Doctor's character developed only through interaction with an ever-changing weekly cast. It's much more fluid when he has a cohort of familiar characters around him who can develop in tandem with him over longer periods, as is usually the case with the Doctor/Companion dynamic (Series 8 being, in my opinion, a good example). I'm sure a solo series could work, and it's a fascinating idea that could provide countless avenues of creativity, but my gut feeling is that on the whole, it'd probably be harder to get good character development out of the Doctor that way unless done very, very well.
2 months, 2 weeks ago on Clara, or a New Companion? The Results
Well, I guess we won't know definitively. All I feel confident saying is that the method that found young Rupert and the Nethersphere wasn't strictly the same as how Orson was found. They came across the former by actively thinking about the specific person they were trying to find - Orson was just someone else they came across using the 'residual data' (for want of an actual term). The Doctor did clearly imply in the dialogue that I quoted that Orson should, theoretically, be linked to Clara's timeline in some way, not just Danny's, though. There's always the good ol' predestination paradox - their timelines are only linked in the first place because the Doctor would introduce them to each other... because of their timelines being linked... wibbly wobbly... - but it's all just speculation. Personally, I'm inclined to believe there's more to the Orson/Danny/Clara mystery and it's not just a case of the TARDIS randomly picking out Orson whilst searching for Danny.
2 months, 3 weeks ago on Moffat on Orson Pink Mystery
Clara had engineered a scenario (or she thought she had) where "force" wasn't really an option - one hint of an even slightly aggressive move and she could destroy all keys instantly. It was a situation she'd devised such that either she'd win, or they'd both lose (control freak much?). Plus, it's generally a good idea not to get involved in a physical confrontation when you're both balancing over lava. I'm sure the Doctor would have wanted to take them "by force" (or by any means) had the scenario been genuine, but it wasn't conducive to doing so and, moreover, he knew it wasn't real. So no, in those circumstances, even if the volcano had been real, I don't think he'd have been silly enough to resort to force. Instead, he fell back on a much stronger strategy - reasoning and mental coercion.
Correct regarding Rupert, but I don't know if the same quite applied to Orson. Clara wasn't linked to the TARDIS when the Doctor came across Orson (she was on a date with Danny, which was interrupted by Orson in his spacesuit). The Doctor just asked if they'd met before, and then gave the excuse that "the TARDIS was slave to your timeline, theoretically there should be some connection". Given that she'd never met Orson (how do you actively think about someone you don't know exists?), that implied - to me - that there was some other kind of link that the TARDIS was acting on, such as a genetic link. Some of the later lines of dialogue between Clara and Orson are certainly designed to make us think as such.
It feels cruel just saying this, so please hear me out, but... I'm glad Osgood isn't coming back. I know there are plenty of people who would eagerly lap up any kind of cop-out resolution that returns her to life, but that's the last thing I'd want right now - consequence is necessary to story just as it is to life, and there's no greater consequence than death. It added the kind of weight and gravitas to the finale that many prior finales have lacked; even though the day was saved, something meaningful was still lost. My inner sociopath barely batted an eyelid when Osgood was atomised on my first viewing (other than to think "Oh wow - they actually did that"), but with each subsequent repeat I've come to find it a more and more powerful moment. Not only was it the sharp kick that the story was calling for, it was invaluable in 'forging' Missy. It was crucial that the new Master announced themselves in dramatic fashion, and she did just that in eliminating a fan favourite and audience surrogate. To resurrect Osgood now would not only detract from Capaldi's debut finale, but it'd rip away Missy's defining moment thus-far. No matter how popular the character, there's simply no way that her return would be worth the detriment. I firmly believe it's best she stays dead. As for Clara/Danny/Orson, I've been saying this since time immemorial (probably inaccurately), but my suspicion is that Clara could already be pregnant. If she is, we'll know by the end of the Christmas special. It would be odd if Orson wasn't related to Clara in any way though - didn't the TARDIS hone in on Orson because he was in some way linked to Clara? If that's not through blood, I don't know how else she's connected to her dead boyfriend's vague relative from the far future.
Personally, I was finding that the Eleventh Doctor's childishness was wearing thin. I'm enjoying Capaldi's slightly more hardened, weary take on the Doctor, it's a refreshing character revamp after having eight years of bubbly, excitable, youthful Doctors running around flapping their arms, getting into romances and being deeply emotional. That's no criticism of Smith or Tennant - they're two of my favourite Doctors - but we were well overdue a meaningful shift toward something new and different. I'm confident that Capaldi's Doctor will continue to mellow out a little over time, but I'd hate for him to lose his grumpy side. I don't want to see Peter Capaldi try to play Matt Smith. I want to see Peter Capaldi being Peter Capaldi and playing the Doctor his own way. So far, he's nailing it.
2 months, 3 weeks ago on Capaldi’s Doctor Will Evolve in Series 9
Unfortunately I feel the exact same way about Miranda (again - apologies to its fans). Taking Doctor Who out of the equation, this entire line-up is very disappointing IMO. It's got two of the least funny half-hour comedies I've seen and then slaps you in the face with Michael McIntyre to add insult to injury. No-one can blame me for being a Scrooge this year, the BBC are trying to force it upon me.
3 months ago on Last Christmas BBC One Time Confirmed
But she did (attempt to) murder Kate (and had no reason to believe she would fail), so she certainly wasn't remotely shy about killing for amusement - which gives me no reason to believe the other deaths weren't also for real. She did gloat over how much fun she was having killing the Doctor's friends when she tried to aim at Clara in the graveyard. The only thing, in my mind, that lends credence to the idea that the device may not have been strictly murderous was the Doctor's seeming willingness to kill Missy. Although she's as crazy and dangerous as ever, the last two times the Doctor and Master met, the Doctor wanted to save/help the Master - one slightly crazy, not-so-evil plan later and he's willing to outright murder her? I know they've made a big point out of the Doctor's grey morality this series, but it seems so out of character that he'd actually do that. I can see how the scenes building up to it may have led to it (Danny forcing the Doctor to acknowledge that not having blood directly on his hands doesn't mean he isn't accountable for the deaths he causes, and then Clara's vengeful ultimatum forcing him to do it to save her "soul"), but still - it's a million miles from their last interactions. That's the only part that makes me wonder.
3 months ago on Could Osgood Still Be Alive?
That's more his element though - I'd rather a writer be allowed to play to their strengths, rather than arbitrarily be assigned to a concept they're less likely to do justice.
3 months ago on Writers to Bring Back for Series 9 & Beyond
Assuming Moffat writes (for argument's sake) 5 episodes of the next series, I'd divide the remaining 8 up amongst Matthew Graham (it's been long enough for me to forgive Fear Her, especially given his Series 6 offering was a highly underrated gem of a story), Neil Gaiman (I think it's obligatory to love him, even if his Cyberman outing didn't quite hit all the right notes), Jamie Mathieson (he absolutely stole the show in Series 8), Tom MacRae (he's yet to write an episode I haven't fully enjoyed), Mark Gatiss (his record has been patchy, but when he's on form he can produce some wonderful scripts), Phil Ford (why does this man only ever get co-credits?), Robert Shearman (I pray that one day he'll return to the show - thus far, his only outing has been a masterpiece) and Gareth Roberts (I love the knack he has for introducing The Doctor to very mundane, real-life situations whilst keeping it fascinating and exciting). That's just out of NuWho's established roster, though. Thinking further afield, I'd love if Stephen Fry would finally write an episode (he was initially writing one under RTD, but it wasn't to be) and I think Paul Abbott would make a fine addition.
I sort of feel similar; I wouldn't say I feel like I've "seen it all before", because other than their rampant festivity, Moffat's Christmas Specials have been quite varied for me (though the only one I've particularly liked was the frankly sublime A Christmas Carol). But I would say that what we've seen and heard of this episode so far hasn't particularly thrilled me. This synopsis couldn't really be much more generic once you strip away the Christmas mentions, and what little we've seen of the episode so far hasn't had much of an edge to it either. I'm hoping that the way it's been promoted won't do the episode justice and we're actually in for something a whole lot more exciting than they're willing to tease us with just yet. The series thus far has been sublime, and has Moffat's fingerprints on it more than any other, so he's in good form. I suppose all we can do is wait and trust that there are grander machinations at play.
3 months ago on Last Christmas: Short Synopsis
My memory of the early Torchwood series is getting a little hazy now (it might be time to go back and watch them again), but from what I remember of Out of Time and Captain Jack Harkness they were both rather good episodes. Meat had a nice concept behind it, though I always thought they could have done more to explore the idea of an infinite food source and the implications - moral, ethical and pragmatic - thereof. It was a bit too standard, but solid enough. I don't really remember much of Adam other than that there was some sort of thought-manipulating alien involved; I don't know whether to take that as a sign that it wasn't a particularly great episode or not, it sounds like the sort of thing I'd remember had I felt much love for it. I don't remember any of them being amazing, but nor do I remember any being particularly bad. I suppose that's a reasonable enough commendation - and, of course, it does help to address the gender imbalance too (personally, I'm not too fussed provided the writing is good, but it does seem quite strange that we'll have gone 7 years without a single female writer's credit on a show that churns through so many writers year-on-year). I'll give some of these episodes another watch some time, but I'd say this is good news. Now all they need to do is commission Mathieson, Gaiman and MacRae for episodes.
3 months, 1 week ago on Torchwood’s Catherine Tregenna Penning Series 9 Story
If I recall correctly, she was offered the chance to write one of the Christmas Specials under RTD (I think it was the one that ended up being Voyage of the Damned, but I could be mistaken). She turned it down back then, but supposedly only because she didn't have the time. So, though I'd err on the side of saying it probably won't happen, it's probably not impossible. If the opportunity were to land again at a better time, she'd be crazy not to consider it. She's a great fit for the show (and I say that as someone who was never particularly caught up in the Potter phenomenon).
In addition to what VictorWong1 said (which is correct), there's also the matter of Meta-Crisis Ten. In the Series 4 finale, the Tenth Doctor began to regenerate after being "killed" by a Dalek, but managed to stop the process without having to change his face by siphoning the rest of the regeneration energy into his severed (but regrown) hand from The Christmas Invasion. Most fans at the time didn't count it as a regeneration, but in Matt Smith's final episode - The Time of the Doctor - it was retconned in that it was a real regeneration and did count toward the limit of 13 incarnations that every Time Lord has (though the Doctor later got a whole new cycle of regenerations). So some people, though very few, also count that - which would make Capaldi's incarnation the character's 14th in total, if you're counting both the War Doctor and the Meta-Crisis regeneration. But things are much more confusing that way, since we'd need to re-order all of the recent Doctors - the Ninth being the Tenth, the Tenth being the Eleventh and the Twelfth, the Eleventh being the Thirteenth, etc. So the BBC (and therefore much of the fandom) don't officially count the War or Meta Crisis Doctors in their ordering (they're anomalies), just to keep things simple.
3 months, 1 week ago on A Hint on Jenna Coleman’s Future?
From a real-life point of view, yes, I'd agree with you. But within the narrative, there's not always been any real reason. It's just been about keeping the show fresh for viewers.
3 months, 1 week ago on Capaldi Didn’t Want Twelve to Be Likeable
Not entirely sure what you mean; I don't see any continuity problems in Capaldi's incarnation. Every Doctor has been different, that's the nature of regeneration. He doesn't choose his personality (unless the Sisterhood of Karn get involved). I know that under RTD, there were reasons given for the new Doctor being the way he is (fighting the Time War for ol' Ecclecakes and being 'redeemed' by Rose for Tennant), but not every Doctor has had such clear-cut reasons for regenerating into the man that he does.
Tomato, tomato (please add the appropriate pronunciations mentally; message boards aren't great for conveying inflection).
Completely understand where you're coming from, but I prefer not to think of it in those terms - feels too reboot-ish for my liking (I know it's not a reboot, but by picturing him as Hartnell 2.0 it starts to feel that way). He does have commonalities with Hartnell, but equally he has commonalities with other Doctors; you can see glimmers of Three, Six, Seven, Nine (and probably others) in there too. It's a very informed performance that draws upon a lot of the show's (and character's) history. I'm confident that, in time, his arc will prove itself different to both C. Baker and Hartnell - but I fully understand both comparisons.
That's what I like about him. I loved the warmth and exuberance of Tennant and Smith, but I think Capaldi would have struggled to establish himself if he tried to emulate their style(s). The persona he's given us, like it or loathe it, has made an immediate impact and really entrenched him into the role. I would dare say, however, that he'll lighten up a bit as his era progresses. I think he's on a similar character arc to that intended for Colin Baker - hopefully this time we'll see it through, though.
Can't argue with them? I can barely comprehend them. Still, I'm pretty sure it was an insightful article - just waiting for my friend at NASA to confirm.
3 months, 1 week ago on Series 8: A Numbery-Wumbery Breakdown
I'd have to disagree with that. Although he's still managed to churn out some gems that are at least on par, on the whole Moffat's 'Moffat Era' scripts have been somewhat hit-and-miss for me, whereas under RTD I genuinely feel he wrote the best - or one of the best - stories of each individual series. Which is pretty good going when you're only writing one a year.
3 months, 2 weeks ago on Moffat’s Best Monsters, Tricks & Stories (So Far)
No need for whacking of the head-table variety, easy mistake to make - especially when the whole point is to illustrate how tricky and deceptive Moffat's writing is. You practically proved yourself right by getting it wrong.
Regarding "The Doctor has a secret he will take to his grave" - I think the author has got it the wrong way round here. It wasn't that we were to assume it meant his grave when it meant it his secret, it was the other way around. "You didn't listen, did you? You lot never do! That's the problem. "The Doctor has a secret he will take to the grave. It is discovered." He wasn't talking about my secret. No no no, that's not what's been found. He was talking about my grave. Trenzalore is where I'm buried." Otherwise, great article (even if there are a few glaring omissions - how Blink isn't amongst Moffat's top 6 stories, I'll never know).
I'm no expert, so I fully accept I may be wrong here, but I really don't think that young viewers are really that obsessed with the Daleks. Yeah, they're popular - of course they are. Even much older fans get excited to see them after a lengthy break. But provided that the story-telling is good, that there are other exciting monsters on display, I don't think there are many who are disappointed not to see the Daleks constantly. I don't mind seeing them yearly; if there's a good hook to the story, a new perspective to keep them interesting (such as the Asylum/Parliament, or the Dalek that "turned good"), then by all means give us Daleks. But I do feel that it's probably not as crucial as Moffat seems to consider it. With exciting, engaging and clever story-telling, I don't think it matters to a lot of fans - young and old - whether the Daleks feature weekly, yearly or when Jupiter aligns with Mars. It's always nice to see them, but I don't think anyone would lose interest in the show where they to sink into the background for longer periods - if anything, it'd ramp up the excitement for when they do exterminate their way back into the limelight. TL;DR - Daleks are awesome, but they're not an essential part of every series.
3 months, 2 weeks ago on Moffat: Daleks Are Not A Contractual Obligation
I do find it odd that you bother to include Derek Jacobi, MWTV. For the small amount of time he was on screen as the character, he did have a lot of presence and had he been given chance, I'm sure he'd have gone on to be an extraordinary Master - but he was only a fleeting, transitional incarnation that we caught the final moments of. We know nothing of him, we never really saw him in action bar for electrocuting Chantho, he's an enigma - we'll never know. I'd be more interested to see how things would have gone if only offered the two choices; Simm and Gomez. That aside, I'm voting for Michelle Gomez. I absolutely loved John Simm's take on The Master back in the day, the shift from evil to simply insane really livened up what had been a stale character archetype (in this modern day and age, I expect more nuance from drama than simply infallible hero vs. snide villain). If you'd have told me Missy was actually to be The Master before Dark Water, I'd have been certain there's no way she'd be able to top Simm's take. But two episodes later and I've changed my mind entirely. What I love about Missy, weirdly, is that she's a compromise - she combines the best of Simm's madman act with the more cerebral, calculating Master of old. She's two-in-one; one part crazy and one part cunning. She's pulling the character slightly back toward the more traditional Masters but still managing to feel like a logical continuation of the direction established for the character under Davies and Simm. I really don't know how much more I could have hoped for out of a re-cast Master. I'm even warming more to the ending of Death in Heaven the more I think about it; I like how the "old friend" dynamic was played up, and how there was no real, evil 'conquer the universe' plan behind her actions; it was more of a deranged appeal to an old friend from a twisted mind that can't decide whether she loves or loathes him and wants to pull him over to the dark side. Didn't like the idea at first, but it very clearly defines the dynamic between Twelve and Missy going forward and takes them into slightly newer territory, which can only be a good thing. All in all, although I'll never forget Simm's brilliance in the role, there's only one Master (or Mistress) that comes to mind now: Michelle Gomez.
3 months, 2 weeks ago on Face-Off: New Who Masters
I want something akin to the Nine/Rose/Jack dynamic back. Conventional, contemporary human companion plus eccentric, far-future companion, no explicit romance (besides a bit of flirting) between them; they were just three mates, who all met through their travels and traversed time and space together. I thought that was wonderful, not least because their personalities all meshed well despite being wildly different. Sadly they eked less than half a series from that grouping, but at least that means it's not over-done compared to companion romances. They could very easily give us our usual contemporary female companion, to keep tradition intact, whilst going on to introduce a secondary companion who's either from a vastly different time period or another species to freshen things up. I definitely think it's a direction they should consider.
3 months, 2 weeks ago on Moffat Mulls Future Companion Not Being Another Earth Girl
I know very little about Being Human, so I can't really judge him as a showrunner, but as a recurring writer in Doctor Who I've found him fairly hit-and-miss, and as yet I don't think he's had any real stand-out episodes (I'm talking the real gems, the way Moffat really announced himself - after what was already a good run of episodes - with Blink). I didn't much rate Vampires of Venice or A Town Called Mercy, and School Reunion/The God Complex were only 8/10 material to me. He probably could do a good job if given the responsibility, but so far he's done nothing to make me think "that's the right man for the job".
3 months, 2 weeks ago on Moffat on Series 8 Ratings: There is no drop-off
I personally feel that about five years is a good length of time, and then a new showrunner - if there's a worthy candidate for that role - could help to keep things fresh over a long period. I'm a fan of both Russell T. Davies and Steven Moffat, don't get me wrong; there are things I dislike about both men's writing, but equally they're eclipsed by the ways in which I admire both of their styles. But I can't imagine watching Russell's take on Doctor Who for 10-15 years, or Steven's take for 10-15 years. I'm not calling for a mandatory re-election every 5 years, but I feel that after that length of time there's only so much longer you can keep going before the product starts to feel a little stale (I'm not saying we've hit that point yet, but I'm certain that we would). I'm not saying we should kick the lead writer out every 5 years and re-elect, but I think it's in everyone's best interests - the writer's, the show's and the fans' - if the man in charge doesn't try to hold the limelight for too long. Doctor Who is too large of a juggernaut, with too rich, storied and varied history and heritage, for one man to form an undue monopoly over - would Doctor Who even be here today if Hartnell had played the role for a decade, or would they have just have cancelled it with his departure?
I could well be completely off the mark here, but aren't a lot of people neglecting to consider that it's possible - just possible - that Clara is already pregnant?
3 months, 2 weeks ago on Death in Heaven Review (Part 2): Questions, Questions
Personally, I couldn't really imagine Simm acting alongside Capaldi, nor could I imagine Gomez playing off against Tennant. They're both perfect for the respective Doctor they were paired with.
3 months, 3 weeks ago on Your Verdict on Dark Water & Episode Ranking
It was a three-year contract with the option to extend it by up to two additional years. Evidently, Smith decided against taking on the additional years. Understandable, really. He's a great young actor with lofty Hollywood ambitions.
3 months, 3 weeks ago on Rate & Discuss Death in Heaven
Definitely a hit. Although the material he's had to work with has been a mixed bag, Capaldi always manages to churn out a stellar performance and seems able to redeem any story through the nuances of his acting. He's given us a portrayal of an incarnation that's both deeply unique, and yet still heavily informed by the characteristics of his predecessors. On the downside, he doesn't always speak clearly and loudly enough (I find myself skipping back through an episode to work out he'd said sometimes, which was never a problem in previous series), which is a minor irritation, and there are the odd moments where his delivery seems a tad unusual. But all of that is eclipsed by the variety he displays and the passion he clearly puts into the role. This Doctor's characterisation has been a bit odd at times - the aggressively anti-military tone, for example - but those issues are beyond Capaldi's control. Considering the material he's been working with and that it's his first series in the role (let's face it, Tennant and Smith weren't at their absolute peak in their first series, so one will assume Capaldi will improve in time too), it's definitely a hit. He's already amongst my favourite incarnations.
3 months, 3 weeks ago on Poll: Capaldi’s Doctor – Hit or Miss?
I had assumed that, like the rest of the Cybermen, the Brigadier took off at the end with the intention of destroying himself high up in the atmosphere - I can't imagine the Brig willingly living as a Cyberman. As for the other companions, we simply can't know. I don't suppose there was anything left of Adric after the crash (not to mention it was in prehistoric times) so I'd rule him out. But Sarah-Jane Smith, Amy & Rory Pond etc quite possibly did rise as Cybermen. I'd actually half-expected some sort of grim reference to that, but I'm sort of happy it was left untouched.
That'd be an interesting twist, but then one would have to wonder why they bother to harvest human bodies and consciousnesses at all. There were billions of Time Lords on Gallifrey when it disappeared, certainly no shortage to fill those Cybersuits. I'm also dubious of any story that sees the Master willingly working to help/save his people. As if he wasn't already a despised renegade for most of his life, the last time we saw him he'd just discovered Rassilon and the Council had manipulated him in a way that amounted to torture since his childhood. It's a brilliant thought, I just don't see it going that way (sadly).
3 months, 3 weeks ago on 10 Anticipated Death in Heaven Moments
It's definitely much deeper and more grating, but it's still what I'd call "overly robotic". Still, I'm glad these new Cybermen come with new voices.
I keep forgetting Nick Frost is a part of the Christmas Special - even if the episode itself isn't spectacular, his performance will undoubtedly be a highlight. Interesting premise though, the whole "what is real and what is not" thing; sounds a little like Amy's Choice (it'll probably be nothing like it, but that's the initial impression I get). I wonder if there's going to be a basis in a pre-existing Christmas yarn this year, as has been the way with Moffat's prior Christmas episodes.
3 months, 3 weeks ago on 2014 Christmas Special Plot Hints
I always assumed it was cosmic coincidence, but that's a good question. I don't suppose we'll ever know.
3 months, 3 weeks ago on Face-Off: Utopia vs Dark Water
I think people are going to vividly remember the time the Master returned as a woman for quite some time. It might not quite emulate Utopia's lasting reverence, but it certainly won't be forgotten.
Dark Water for me, but it's a close call. Utopia, whilst decent in its own right, felt largely like an extended set-up for the finale. It was a prologue, and felt as such. Dark Water was a better overall episode. That said, Utopia did provide the slightly more heart-stopping cliffhanger and had a much more tense and exciting reveal. The main reason I can't give it my vote, however, is that we saw so little of both incarnations of the Master to feature in that episode. I felt slightly robbed of Derek Jacobi's incarnation, and it didn't have time to let much of Simm's Master come across. That was obviously intentional, given that it preceded a two-parter that focused on Simm's incarnation, but the fact remains that it just didn't deliver much of either Master. Dark Water, whilst we didn't know her identity until the end, gave us more than a good glimpse of Gomez' incarnation. Utopia was perfect in its role of teasing and setting up the finale, but if we're voting simply between Utopia and Dark Water, as opposed to Utopia/LotTL/TSoD vs. Dark Water/Death in Heaven, I have to give it to Dark Water
3 months, 3 weeks ago on Death in Heaven Advance Review
It doesn't have to be anybody's "fault". It's not a murder plot. Danny looked quite absent-minded (as you would be when dealing with a phone call like that; your attention wouldn't be on your immediate environment) as he was walking towards the road, the woman who picked up his phone said the car came "out of nowhere", implying nobody saw it coming - it's simply a horrible accident, the kind that sadly happen every day around the world.
I think that element has already come into play. I think a part of the extent to Clara's grief (loss can make us do some irrational things, but her betrayal of The Doctor was miles out of character) was that not only did Danny die, but he died before she ever had the chance to be honest and truthful with him - it was something that she'd been dealing with for a long time and had finally mustered the nerve to get off her chest, and then it was snatched away with him. It's kind of like making peace, in a sense - in Clara's eyes, he died being lied to. She can never take back or apologise for those lies now. In my interpretation of the episode (opinions will obviously differ), it was that complete denial of closure - closure that was within reach - that drove her as far as she went and left her feeling so cold and conflicted. It wasn't just grief for a lost loved one; it was that grief amplified by her own sense of guilt.
Deep Breath didn't offer any explanations, it only raised questions on that front - and dedicated a pretty hefty scene to doing so. I don't see why they'd bother to do that if they had no pay-off in mind. Why draw attention to the fact that your new lead actor has appeared before if you've not got a way to explain it? Surely you'd just ignore the issue and let the suspension of disbelief do its thing. Given that it wasn't a theme that recurred throughout the series, I'm guessing it's being held over for next year, much the same that the "Silence Will Fall" mutterings in Series Five weren't explained or elaborated upon until Series 6. I suppose it's not impossible that there's a missing scene in the advance copies that returns to this question, but I've got a feeling that if something has been held back, it won't be related to Capaldi's face. Not yet. But I'd put money on it being something that resurfaces, and is addressed, further down the line. Moffat plays the long game.
Great question actually, I'd quite like to hear D-, sorry, MWTV's take on it. Whilst I do agree somewhat that the whole snogging, "sexy" aspect, tired as it is by now, has been particularly irksome when applied to the Master, I do at least find it a fascinating dynamic that Capaldi's incarnation, unlike his last two (Ten more so than Eleven, admittedly), is conversely very asexual; he doesn't even discern when Clara puts effort into looking nice, and he's no longer a very tactile person.