Does our Doctor get his jacket back somehow afterward? Or is he wearing a slightly different jacket now?
Oooh. Good point. I intend to see all the episodes again before the weekend, so I'll keep an eye on it.
There are enough moments where he should have noticed something that it feels like something deliberate. Whenever writers (especially writers as clever as Moffat) reuse something several times, there is probably some significance to it. It also fits in with the whole style of clues and mystery that we're assuming is going on here.
Indeed.
Would he leave her in prison if he knew that her future self had to be with the clerics to cause the angel sequence to happen?
Ack. My head just started hurting again. And I think you may be right. That would solve that problem. Which means I am slightly more willing to accept the "killing the Doctor" theory. Still, I think the Clerics' reaction still do not fit with this idea. And River did not seem to be worried about what would happen to them at Pandorica.
Yes. Maybe whatever happens to make Amy give her watch to River also causes the Doctor to change watches?
Good idea.
I really can't shake the feeling that she's more than meets the eye. A lot of her child scenes whisper that to me, and there was that preview for Vampires of Venice that cast her in an ominous light (even though the episode itself didn't really).
The preview cast her in an ominous light?
I do too, but when I imagine the most dangerous thing in the universe, the sort of thing that entire races would fear, the sort of thing that would be sealed away, and also the sort of thing that could be described, in the preview, as a warrior, or a trickster, soaked in the blood of a billion galaxies -- I think of the Doctor gone horribly wrong.
Hmmm. It could be someone like the Black Guardian, I suppose? Moffat does like reaching back into old Who.
If it's not the destruction of the time vortex within the TARDIS that causes the cracks, then it must be whatever is in the Pandorica, perhaps used by Amy to bring Rory back and breaking the rules of the universe, cracking it.
It's the only explanation for it I can come up with -- that it illustrates some truth about memory that will be important to the finale's plot.
Indeed.
Certainly possible. The whole fairy tale thing makes me wonder about Amy though ... and whether she might not actually be something from a fairy tale, something different than a regular person. There's no real "evidence" for that though, just feelings.
Hmm. What do you have in mind, though? Which fairy tale?
Mmhmm. I couldn't quite make out everything he was saying, but it was something about "Amy, why not Amelia?" He was doing that thing of his where he thinks through ideas very quickly, and somehow that got in there even though he was trying to save her life, so he quickly said "Nevermind!" and went on to the idea of closing her eyes.
And if he really is unfocused because of a timeline shift, it might be one of those things he will kick himself for not realizing earlier, if it turns out to mean anything.
That would be good.
Yes, I don't agree with me either, I was just talking possibilities out loud. I like that The Lodger revealed that perception filters can trick your memory as well though. I would like that to be an important fact, and would love for a perception filter based reveal to play a part. If the repetition of an unfocused Doctor is deliberate, so too might be the repetition of the perception filter.
Oh, definitely.
I agree. But I am not sure that has happened. Or. Hmm, my love for time travel is quickly waning. There is a tendency of Doctor Who that the Doctor causes things he is trying to avert. Or... anyway. Could it be that the cracks are caused by the loss of Rory? Or that -- and as I type this my brain stops holding on to things. I have this strange contradictory feeling. I believe in the second Doctor thing, and him trying to fix things by tweaking the timeline. But at the same time, I have this sneaking suspicion that Amy's finding the ring just before the finale is not a coincidence. Her reaction to Rory's death (as we have seen before) will be extreme. And combined with some sort of powerful weapon could cause cracks. Hmmm. I don't think I articulated that well at all. I may have to return to this post to clean up later.
This plus some of the stuff you said below is interesting, and now I'm leaning your direction on this. I like the idea that as soon as the Doctor set onto this path, the future in which the cracks appear became a reality, and said cracks began to reach back into the timeline that caused them. The second Doctor trying to manipulate or correct events still works with that idea. You've swayed me, which is good, because I was never in love with all that time travel stuff I wrote further below, about things being different and just how far the timeline might be altered, all that. It didn't quite fit for me, but the thoughts were in my head so I included them.
Whoo. I am still not entirely sure what I think on this, but swaying is good
Hmmm. Could it be that we are watching the first Doctor? And that it is the SECOND that has a jacket and no TARDIS?
I think it's just a matter of how you define it or look at it. If the events already happened once, then Jacket Doctor is the first Doctor. If the events haven't "happened", but if the Doctor's actions will make them happen, thus setting into motion a future that involves a Doctor with no TARDIS, allowing said Doctor to move back into his timeline to alter things, then our Doctor could be considered the first one.
Either way, the Jacket Doctor is from the future of events.
Yes. Hmmm. I think we need a new vocabulary. Perhaps "original" and "secondary" Doctors?
I couldn't shake the feeling that there was no aunt. She still wasn't home at 11:30 p.m., leaving a young girl home alone. But that young girl knew how to cook for herself and was not afraid. It might be nothing. But I have suspicions.
Indeed.
Edit: oh, and someone told me that the child Amelia will appear in the finale. That sort of fits with the "Amy isn't what she appears" theory. Unless it will be a flashback -- although flashback is a dubious term in relation to time travel.
Ooh, interesting.
Well, it might just be that she shows up in a scene with Doctor in TARDIS-Doctor which we have not seen before. It does not necessarily mean that she becomes part of the Pandorica-thing.
*MySmiley*
structured procrastinator
structured procrastinator
Doctor Who series speculation
- 17/06/2010 03:00:04 AM
2079 Views
I'm going to watch it all over again (again ) so that I can comment with my eye on the ball
- 17/06/2010 05:25:27 AM
828 Views
) so that I can comment with my eye on the ball
- 17/06/2010 05:25:27 AM
828 Views
You are great and wonderful.
- 17/06/2010 12:06:29 PM
1177 Views
Re: You are great and wonderful.
- 17/06/2010 02:25:44 PM
894 Views
Re: You are great and wonderful.
- 17/06/2010 02:45:14 PM
939 Views
Before I go on reading the other posts...
- 19/06/2010 05:07:51 PM
743 Views
Good stuff
- 17/06/2010 01:12:55 PM
708 Views
Re: Good stuff
- 17/06/2010 01:17:47 PM
785 Views
Re: Good stuff
- 17/06/2010 03:35:27 PM
863 Views
Re: Good stuff
- 17/06/2010 03:40:51 PM
819 Views
Hmm. What of the old lady in the first episode?
- 17/06/2010 11:09:44 PM
902 Views
I did the exact same thing.
- 18/06/2010 12:04:19 AM
898 Views
I love your speculation here. May I add my own pet theory?
- 18/06/2010 10:05:56 AM
788 Views
Re: I love your speculation here. May I add my own pet theory?
- 18/06/2010 10:19:21 AM
876 Views
About the cracks.
- 18/06/2010 10:57:34 AM
1001 Views
Re: About the cracks.
- 18/06/2010 01:20:23 PM
837 Views
Cheers for the shout out!
- 18/06/2010 11:45:52 PM
894 Views
Oh, and something to think about - Amy = Romana anyone? Longshot. *NM*
- 18/06/2010 11:50:14 PM
497 Views
Aaaand, (watching the episodes with the Silurians and the Lodger) (Edited)
- 19/06/2010 09:52:38 AM
815 Views
With regards to what he said to Amy when she was seven...
- 19/06/2010 07:00:56 PM
830 Views
Watches
- 23/06/2010 08:04:53 PM
708 Views
I don't know if it can be the Time Agent thing the Doctor's wearing, can it?
- 24/06/2010 09:31:38 AM
797 Views
Remember ...
- 24/06/2010 04:42:27 PM
872 Views
Taking another look at it (since I was looking at the one from Time of Angels)...
- 24/06/2010 04:59:21 PM
874 Views