Doctor Who

[Two-step]

The fact that we understand aliens has been explained as a part of the TARDIS' telepathic field. As indepth an explanation as the Babelfish.

Let's not forget verisimilitude in these sci-fi comedy-action series. It doesn't have to make scientific sense, but things should still be explainable and plausible within the setting, which really isn't the case for Moffatt, who really doesn't care about any of Dr Who's established rules (even less so than RTD did)

NOPE, you are wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong!!!!
The Doctor is a Time Lord and can do things far above and beyond our meager understandings of the universe and physics. In fact, he has traveled beyond the universe and only a very few can even dare to claim they have even the tiniest amount of knowledge of what is and isn't possible there... or what was brought back.

What makes since to us in this timeline can easily be altered, thanks to the powers of TARDIS. We only know what the Doctor has chosen to share with us and who knows what things he did/will do/ is doing right this second... Heck, by the time I finish this we might find that Al Gore was elected president and never got around to inventing the Internet for us. LOL

 

[Chromevod]

Heck, by the time I finish this we might find that Al Gore was elected president and never got around to inventing the Internet for us. LOL

... what?

Okay, getting off topic for just a bit what makes you think friggin' Al Gore invented the internet? The guy has NEVER claimed he invented the internet! The internet's origins are in ARPAnet which was around since . What you call the internet is actually just the World Wide Web, with internet being what you use to access it.

Actually, I wonder if the Doctor will ever go back to visit Tim Berners-Lee as he works on the World Wide Web. Probably not for a while but it may happen. At least not until the guy dies.

 

[Alphadrop]

... what?

Okay, getting off topic for just a bit what makes you think friggin' Al Gore invented the internet?

It's a fairly common joke that Gore invented the internet. Comes from a misquote from one of his speeches.

 

[TheWesDude]

Okay, getting off topic for just a bit what makes you think friggin' Al Gore invented the internet? The guy has NEVER claimed he invented the internet! The internet's origins are in ARPAnet which was around since . What you call the internet is actually just the World Wide Web, with internet being what you use to access it.

errr, not exactly.

World Wide Web is a communication protocol that carries higher protocol data ( such as http/s ).


the internet is not something you "use" to access...

the internet is a connected group of autonomous networks that share the same lower tier protocols ( tcp/ip ) to provide inter-network* communication. you have a "local" provider who provides you access to THEIR independent network which allows communication to other connected networks.



* thats right, technically "internet" is slang/shorthand. the real term is "inter-connected network(s)"

 

[Brother None]

Yeah yeah, drop the off-topic stuff, guys, Two-step was making a joke.

NOPE, you are wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong!!!!

No I'm not. You're just not familiar with the history of Dr Who. Throughout its history, the show establishes how the Web of Time directed the flow of history and was maintained by the Time Lords, which created much stricter rules. For instance the Doctor could only go back to the genesis of the Daleks because the Time Lords sent him there. And even how after the Web of Time was broken up (and RTD at least made note of that) rules remained, like "fixed points in time", "can't travel along your own timeline" and the Blinovitch Limitation effect. Moffatt just opted to ignore all these established setting rules completely.

Is the Valeyard actually another incarnation of the Doctor, or a separate being that just originates from the Doctor sometime between 12 and 13?

Spoilers for the 6th Doctor Trial of a Time Lord arc:
[spoiler:1e84f3e341]The Valeyard is an incarnation or distillation of the "dark side" of the Doctor extracted between his 12th and 13th incarnation. He calls the 6th Doctor to court before the Time Lords in the "Trial of a Time Lord" arc, for "conduct unbecoming a time lord", but in actuality because he wants to take over the Doctor's remaining regenerations.

It happened twice in the old series where a portion of the Doctor's essence would be extracted during regeneration, once in the Watcher between the 4th and 5th, and once with the Valeyard. How and why this occurs is never explained for either one.[/spoiler:1e84f3e341]

It's almost recommended to go back and watch such arcs, though Trial of the Time Lord isn't very good and features probably the worst Doctor of all (the 6th), but it also features the best non-companion Doctor Who character of all time, Sabalom Glitz.

 

[Chromevod]

Yeah, I've heard... less than stellar things about the 6th Doctor. Seems like the whole incarnation was a failed attempt at a darker Doctor.

Again, correct me if I get classic Who stuff wrong.

 

[Brother None]

Nope, about right. It was a clear split from the 4th/5th which were similar in personality. 6th isn't so much dark as he is very self-centured, arrogant and outwardly uncaring (though later on it becomes clearer he is a bit caring). He dressed like a clown too. It didn't end well, he's the only Doctor who didn't hang around for his own regeneration (other than 8th-9th obviously, but that's different), the "regeneration scene" to the 7th is kind of embarrassing. In fact the first episode of the 7th Doctor is kind of embarrassing. The 7ths era overall is much better and actually about as dark as Dr Who got, especially once Mel is gone (probably the worst companion of all time), replaced by Ace (one of the best companions of all time). Paradise Towers is one of my favorite classic eps, after Douglas Adams' Pirate Planet. I think if there's any consensus it's probably that the old series peaked around Season 16-17 and the whole Key to Time arc and Romana as a companion, possibly expanded to earlier times to include Sarah Jane and K-9.

Here's a quick keyword guide to the Doctors that I that I once thought up in a random convo with Sander.

Old Doctor

Scruffy Doctor

Fighty Doctor

THE Doctor

Passive Doctor

Abrasive Doctor

Scheming Doctor

Byronesque Doctor

Smiley Doctor

Awesome Doctor

Shouty Doctor

I think fans of the classics will get most of these instantly.

 

[Chromevod]

I have to agree with calling Baker THE Doctor, mainly because even though I've yet to start watching old Who, I STILL have taken the time to watch clips from his time. Specifically some Jelly Baby scenes.

Old Who is definitly on my list of shows to archive binge, as in the next one on the list once I finish watching DS9.

 

[Brother None]

Yeah. The 4th, mostly because he was the first one to hit it internationally (especially the US) and because he stuck around so long, he's just how people see the Doctor. References to his scarf are still made even by people who've never watched the old Doctor, and the jelly-baby thing is legend, even referenced in the film by the 8th. The 8th Doctor, btw, was pretty good in my opinion, from what we could see in the film. He had potential. Too bad the film was shit.

Be aware if you want to watch the 1st: a lot of episodes from the 1st and 2nd Doctors have been lost during a fire at BBC storage, and the footage of them is now lost forever, and only available in stills. There's one more episode in the 4th's arc, called Shada, which was never completely finished, though you'll find it put together with Baker's narrative on DVDs.

 

[Two-step]

Yeah yeah, drop the off-topic stuff, guys, Two-step was making a joke.

Yes, it was a joke.
To be honest, I am pretty familiar with the Internet. In fact, I have been around way longer than even the Commodore 64 and remember when Atari game systems where all the rage.


While so many people are bashing "this and that" about Doctor Who, they tend to forget that it exist purely for the purpose of entertainment, not education. That is why they call it sci-fi and not sci-fact.

Okay, not everyone likes each and every doctor or companion... or other DW character, that is strictly with in your rights as a human being and Doctor Who watcher. But, you don't have to ruin the fun for the rest of us, who actually do like it.

Every incarnation of Doctor goes through a personality change. They even have to discover what foods their new body likes.

Somebody mentioned that each doctor is younger than the last. That might also explain why each new Doctor is more "dark" then the last.... he could be "reverse" aging (Like Merlin?) and becomes younger as he gets older. Because he is getting younger it may be more difficult to cope with what he has done, is doing, will do, and the reason for it. It may be that as he gets "younger" he is starting to lose much of the wisdom he gained but still retains the experience.

As far as time travel rules, who really gives a rat's fart. Sci-fi rules exist at the discretion of the writers.

As far as the Blinovitch Limitation effect, it was written into Doctor Who in 1972, the year I was born. Also, it was theory, not proven scientific fact. Chances are, the theory could be wrong and an element of the "Grandfather Paradox" exists.

Also, it is time travel.... take a minute and just think about that. As far as I know, time travel is purely theory and used only to make science fiction shows more interesting. Now, if anyone can prove time travel then I dare you to do so... and, we will go back in time together and fix Doctor Who accordingly. Just don't step on any butterflies in the process.


Oh, and enjoy the show... it is very entertaining even if not anchored in reality.

 

[Brother None]

While so many people are bashing "this and that" about Doctor Who, they tend to forget that it exist purely for the purpose of entertainment, not education. That is why they call it sci-fi and not sci-fact.

That's not how fiction works. Just because it's fantasy doesn't mean it doesn't have to be consistent and plausible. Verisimilitude is a generally accepted, if you want to personally ignore it, that's fine, but drop the whole "you're watching it wrong". No we're not, and it's annoying when you pretend we are.

But, you don't have to ruin the fun for the rest of us, who actually do like it.

What? If you don't want to see criticism of Dr Who, don't visit forums where the series is going to be discussed. People have every right to be critical.

That might also explain why each new Doctor is more "dark" then the last....

No they're not, they've never been as dark as the 7th got.

Also, it is time travel....

You know what sucks about it other than verisimilitude? The fact that Moffatt has ruined every Dr Who plot from here on out. He solved writing himself in a corner in the Big Bang arc by having the Doctor travel in his own timeline. If he can do that, why is he having trouble with anything? Now every time the Doctor is cornered I can just shrug and go "he can travel back and stop himself from doing that". It really sucks ass.

PS: oh, and the Blinovitch Limitation is not a theory, it was seen in action several times during the series, including the 9ths

 

[Sander]

You are confusing real-life scientific plausibility with a consistent universe. Good fiction is internally consistent. You won't ever see magic in a Star Trek episode, for instance (or at least, you shouldn't) because it doesn't fit the setting and doesn't fit the internal rules.

Good fiction is coherent and internally consistent and doesn't just change the rules at the drop of a hat just because they can. Those kinds of things break the suspension of disbelief. That internal consistency does not need to be connected to reality in any sense. Even a series like Harry Potter is internally consistent in its rules regarding magic, as are all kinds of fictional universes which do scientifically impossible things. It's not about whether it's possible, it's whether the described story forms a coherent and consistent universe that people can believe in. And not a universe where shit just happens because why the fuck not.

If a writer cannot be bothered to stick to his own rules, he isn't creating an interesting universe in which people can follow the logic and understand why something can and cannot happen. Instead, he is creating his own personal playground. And that's bad fiction. You can justify these infractions all you want, but this last episode written by Steven Moffat was exactly that: bad fiction.

 

[Chromevod]

You won't ever see magic in a Star Trek episode, for instance (or at least, you shouldn't)

I'll just leave this here.

As for the big bang crossing timelines... well to be fair the universe was already ending.

 

[Verd1234]

Whoa dude. Q is not a wizard....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke's_three_laws

Besides near-omnipresent beings have been around in Science Fiction for a while and they aren't actually magical or anything...

EDIT: Actually Q is internally consistent because beings like him have been in Star Trek since the beginning of Star Trek...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Squire_of_Gothos



On topic, I have only watched the 9th and 10th doctors. I never got around to watching the 11th doctor because in his trailers the acting always seems.....off.... I don't know how to explain it but it doesn't feel as natural as the previous two...

 

[Courier]

On topic, I have only watched the 9th and 10th doctors. I never got around to watching the 11th doctor because in his trailers the acting always seems.....off.... I don't know how to explain it but it doesn't feel as natural as the previous two...

His acting is actually pretty good, it's the writing that's been off a bit in the past two series.

 

[Chromevod]

Whoa dude. Q is not a wizard....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke's_three_laws

Besides near-omnipresent beings have been around in Science Fiction for a while and they aren't actually magical or anything...

EDIT: Actually Q is internally consistent because beings like him have been in Star Trek since the beginning of Star Trek...

Yes, Q is internally consistent, and the entire Q continuum makes sense within the story. Doesn't stop it from being magic. Oh there may be something in the story that helps it be 'science' but functionally it's magic.

Anyway, back on topic with the Doctor. I kinda think that's the point of the eleventh Doctor, he's off in a lot of ways. He's acting much more alien than 9 and 10 did.

Seriously, the guy seems a bit more unstable then he did as 9 and 10. He attacked a Dalek with a spanner. He's reckless, and it's even more obvious that he's making stuff up as he goes along, more so than even 10. Not to say 11 doesn't do it well but he seems to lose his cool a bit more easily than 10.

 

[Courier]

Anyway, back on topic with the Doctor. I kinda think that's the point of the eleventh Doctor, he's off in a lot of ways. He's acting much more alien than 9 and 10 did.

Seriously, the guy seems a bit more unstable then he did as 9 and 10. He attacked a Dalek with a spanner. He's reckless, and it's even more obvious that he's making stuff up as he goes along, more so than even 10. Not to say 11 doesn't do it well but he seems to lose his cool a bit more easily than 10.

I like him. He's like a mix of Tennant and Baker.

Actually now that I think about it he's a bit of a mix of all the previous doctor's personalities.

 

[Chromevod]

Oh I like him too. But, then again I'm a bit biased since he was the Doctor who introduced me to the series.

Yeah, I'll admit it. I started with Eleventh Hour. Give me a chance to explain!

So yeah, after browsing TV tropes for a few months, I kept seeing all this Doctor Who stuff on it. I'm wondering why this show seems to be on almost EVERY page I come across. So one day while channel surfing I notice that Doctor Who is gonna be on in about 10 minutes, and my whole brain just went 'what the hell!' and I tuned in. It just so happened to be the premier of Eleventh Hour. I enjoyed it and decided to tune in for the next episode, then the next at which point I was introduced to the Daleks. After this point I decided it was time to catch up.

So then by the time the Big Bang aired I had went ahead and caught up on the revival.

So, yeah. I think I've done an adequate job of catching up, at least with new Who. As I said, old Who is next on my list of shows to watch. Once I finish with DS9, which shouldn't be too hard since I'm half way through season 5 of 7 there.

 

[Verd1234]

Yes, Q is internally consistent, and the entire Q continuum makes sense within the story. Doesn't stop it from being magic. Oh there may be something in the story that helps it be 'science' but functionally it's magic.

Yeah, actually I think I might agree with you on this....


Anyway, you guys have convinced me. I am going to go start watching the 11th doctor and give him a chance...

 

[Two-step]

Theory
A supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, esp. one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.

a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"

Science fiction is a genre of fiction dealing with imaginary but more or less plausible (or at least non-supernatural) content such as future settings, futuristic science and technology, space travel, aliens, and paranormal abilities. Exploring the consequences of scientific innovations is one purpose of science fiction, making it a "literature of ideas".

Science fiction is largely based on writing rationally about alternative possible worlds or futures. It is similar to, but differs from, fantasy in that, within the context of the story, its imaginary elements are largely possible within scientifically established or scientifically postulated laws of nature (though some elements in a story might still be pure imaginative speculation).

Good science fiction, at least in my opinion, is or should be rooted in the principals of factual science. Science is not some stagnant and dogmatic ancient religion, but rather a living and growing understanding of the world around us. It is ever changing. Therefore, good science fiction will allow for fictional science to grow and expand as new "facts" are brought to light.
Failure to see that science changes shows a lack of applied intelligence and education. Failure to see that fictional science can change shows a lack of applied imagination. Both are the curses of the dogmatic mind that is not capable of or simply refuses to accept change, something typically applied to the narrow minded, uneducated, and those with a cult mentality.

Bill Nigh, in his statement about global warming, said "This is the best theory that we have". While I disagree with his theory on global warming, I do agree with the "best theory we have" part of the quote.

Maybe, in 1972, when they came up with the Doctor' Who time travel theory, it was the best they had.. or pulled out of their butts as the case may be.
Being science fiction, thus based on the principals of real science, it is possible the conceive that the theory grew as it came to be explored and better understood. Almost any science fiction show demonstrates this very thing, from Doctor Who to Star Gate and especially Star Trek.

At one time, science told us that the Earth was flat and at the center of the universe. As our understanding of science grew we cam to know better and know that there is so much more still to discover.

My primary interest is not physics but rather history, mainly of the mid to late 19th American history. I have been involved in many historical discussions, sometimes taking the side against contemporary historical thought. It is easy to see that history changes, based on the facts at hand. It is only a matter of dogmatic thought that keeps people from learning certain truths about the world around us. This same dogmatic thought is also what prevents so many people from accepting that things change in their favorite science fiction show.

Knowing how a few simple facts can change an entire understanding of something, it is not difficult for me to accept that the principals applied to Doctor Who's time travel can also change.... that or I simply don't care enough to get bent out of shape over such a minor thing.

Everyone is a critic, me included....
Here is the thing though, what we think of the show and it's current manifestation, is going to have very little impact in the grand scheme of the universe. The writers are going to keep getting payed, the actors are going to keep playing the part, and the network is going to keep airing it for the purpose of getting advertising dollars... as long as the ratings are high enough to justify keeping the show going..

I do agree with the critics on certain points and to a certain degree and do understand their complaints... I can even sympathize with them as the same thing has happened to some of my favorite sci-fi sub genres. But, I am not so upset over the changes that I feel the need to bash the professionals...

Personally, I like Doctor Who. It is one of the few shows that I can sit down and watch with my family and not worry about my son learning the newest "swear word" and deciding he should use it at school... "Frack" being my favorite. I for one, hope that it stays on for a very long time.
BTW, by son got sent home for calling his teacher a slug face ( Thanks Rugrats). But, in their defence, they thought he had called her a slut face. With Doctor Who, I don't have to worry about such tripe coming from my sons mouth at school.