That’s the one with River Song and the Weeping Angels? It’s on tomorrow night.
That’s what the UK pace thread is for. I would encourage any US watchers to avoid the above spoilers at all (reasonable) costs.
The last three posts in this thread were originally in the U.S. thread.
Well, Moffat admitted that the whole 1990 thing was an error. He genuinely seemed surprised when the interviewer brought it up. Listen to the interview yourself.
This is more like it!
Great intro with the Doctor popping out of the cake. I loved Venice and the vampires were wonderful and creepy for a good bit of the show. Still loving the Doctor, a bit unsure about Miss Pond and I disliked the fiancé, but what the hell, it didn’t get in the way of the story. It was still a bit rushed, but these kind of episodes have been so since the revival.
The series does seem to be improving and the trailer for next week’s episode looks good. The funny thing about this new season is that it’s very much like RTD’s seasons. So far I’ve seen very few changes in the actual tone and feel of the stories. What worked then still appears to work now and vice-versa. I was very worried Mofatt would do something I’d hate with the show, but he’s sticking close to what has already been done. The bad side of this is that we still get a lot of the overly sentimental stuff and all those soap-opera bits, but hey, I loved the previous 5 years, so I’m feeling good.
Yep. looks like next week will answer some of the questions we’ve been asking.
A third week in a row I can’t watch Who on BBC1 with my daughter! Glad to hear the series is finally on the up.
I was sure Carlo the assistant was going to play a role in the climax.
Pity all Carlos did was loot.
I like Rory. He’s bright, and pretty astute. And I like the new Doctor’s rudeness. Silly monsters, nice setting, and poor Rory, having the Doctor announce that at his stag party.
I like the juxtaposition of Rory not being flummoxed with the Tardis being “bigger on the inside than on the outside”; actually demonstrating that he may be more than he first appears too, and too friggin’ bad that the Doctor has to be disappointed by that.
And son-vampire’s reaction to Rory’s version of “Yo Momma’s” was entertaining
The Mama vampire killing off herself and allegedly thereby her complete species at the end seemed trite and out what they established as her character. Of course the whole premise was goofy, so what do we expect? A fun silly filler episode. No Blink but a decent lark.
I was disappointed in this episode. I was looking forward to real Vampires, especially as this episode was written by Toby Whithouse who writes Being Human, instead I got fish aliens that for some reason were allergic to UV.
The end was a Star Trek style cop out ending and no explanation was given as to how long it would take for the 10, 000 fish aliens in the Venician canals to die off.
Amy is becoming annoying, although her boyfriend seems like a decent character.
This was another let down and watching Doctor Who is becoming an increasingly poor way to spend a Saturday evening.
Although for the record I still like Matt Smith.
I didn’t like him at first, but he’s grown on me, and wouldn’t mind at all if he stuck around for awhile.
It’s Doctor Who - it’ll always be aliens; that’s what the show’s about. Supernatural stuff is always an alien.
See State Of Decay from the classic series - the bad guys were real vampires.
Pity I wasn’t writing it down, or I’d have the quote right.
“Most people just nick stationery from work.”
(or something close)
I love the way that Amy and the Doctor both act like excited little kids together. It’s like they can be nearly sensible adults if there’s only one of them – or at least can pretend to be. But together they can’t even pretend.
As I recall (and it has been many, many years since I saw it) they were aliens, not supernatural.
I’m a bit behind, and I’m sure it’s going to be covered, but just in case, from the preview for the episode after “Vampires of Venice”…
Someone refers to Amy’s village as “being lost in time” or something along those lines.
Maybe Moffat was playing or something. Maybe he’s surprised people noticed. But there’s something screwy about that village and how time works in it.
I also went back with the wife and rewatched the scene that didn’t make sense in the second Angels episode. It’s definitely not the “same” Doctor. It’s him from the future. 100% absolutely certain. Damned sure not a production error.
Well, it didn’t really seem like they were loose in “the canals”, they were in some specific pool. Otherwise I’m guessing we’d have heard mention of everyone who ends up swimming disappearing in a frothy red mess.
-Joe
You of all people should know that sometimes it’s a robot made out of liquorice.
Overall I thought this was by far the weakest episode yet (of a very strong season, however). There were some good scenes, but it seemed thrown together. The bit with the Doctor popping out of the cake was funny, but it didn’t really make any sense and didn’t seem very much like the Doctor to me. The [del]vampires[/del] fish from space never seemed like a real threat and the absurdity of the Doctor always encountering strange aliens mucking with time wherever he goes was a bit too blatant here, especially since the cracks following Amy would have made it relatively easy to explain this time.
I hated Amy and the Doctor getting all giddy, since it was way too similar to the Doctor and Rose in the werewolf episode. One thing I’d liked about this Doctor and this series was that although he and Amy obviously enjoy the derring-do of their adventures, they also take threats seriously. Ten’s giddiness at the prospect of a werewolf murdering people was funny, but it was also jarring and a bit unlikable, and seemed to be played that way deliberately as an example of Ten’s hubris. This just seemed like out of place silliness.
Venice was just an excuse for fancy costumes (and costume gags) but wasn’t really part of the story. We were supposed to see how time travel changes you, but it was just another monster-of-the-week episode, and Rory should have (but probably hasn’t thanks to the cracks) seen more interesting and frightening things in his own time, which they might as well have stayed in for all the difference it made to the plot.
Finally, the resolution seemed pretty weak, with the Doctor more-or-less accepting the destruction of the fish-from-space race without ever trying to do anything like find them another home or trying to save their planet to begin with. Heck, what would have been so bad about giving them a place to live on Earth? Did it have to be Venice? Couldn’t Venice have been evacuated? Did they have to eat humans? (Presumably not - what were they going to live off after Venice had sunk?)
I know I’ve argued before in this thread that we should all just ignore unexplained elements as part of Doctor Who’s Doctor Whoiness, but these ones really bugged me, which I think is the sign of a weak story that can’t keep me engaged enough to suspend disbelief. I’ll try to take my own advice though. . . .
Something was a bit off with this one. The whole thing felt like the first rough cut of what might have been a decent episode. It was visually quite sumptuous, but the direction or editing or acting wasn’t good enough. For example, the pre-credit sequence – it was quite funny, but then it just fizzled out and you were almost waiting for the director to shout “cut!” And you can’t end the pre-credits on a joke – the Doctor Who theme is too dramatic and menacing. To suddenly have the theme tune cut in at that point seemed jarring and weird.
Then, we were suddenly in the Tardis, with Rory, in a strange scene with the Doctor doing some welding, for no apparent reason. How we got to there from the stag party was not explained. As so often in this show, it felt like whole scenes had been cut for time.
Later, we had the Venetian guy’s daughter being killed, but then a scene or two later him sitting around a table cracking jokes with the others. It also wasn’t explained how he came to be wearing Rory’s stag party T-shirt. It was an amusing image, and quick-thinking viewers would have worked out that he had swapped his clothes with Rory earlier on, but again I think that it needed just a 5-second scene to set up the joke for the rest of us.
And Amy continues to be a problem. I think Karen Gillan is a good actor, perhaps the most naturally talented of any of the companion actors in New Who (well, except Bernard Cribbins, of course). But she’s inexperienced, and needs a good director. She acts individual scenes well, but doesn’t seem to carry over the tone of one scene into the next. Not easy, I imagine, because they shoot these things out of sequence, but that is part of being a TV/film actor. So you get a fearful and relieved Amy after some perilous encounter with a vampire, but in the very next scene she’s back to the usual pouting too-cool-for-school attitude. And in the next scene she’s suddenly Thelma from Scooby Doo, finding a plucky way to defeat a monster with a make-up mirror. The characterisation is all over the place.
I agree, except that the “Velma (not Thelma) from Scooby Doo” scene was last week when she was crawling on the ground in the forest trying to find her communicator with her eyes closed.