I had the same feeling. In other 2 (or more) Doctor episodes the “guest” Doctor(s) always acted like they were The Doctor* and the current Doctor was some sort of younger inexperienced version (even though of course they weren’t.)
*The definite article, you might say.
so i joked to my spouse that ok, that explains it, ‘obviously’ the Doctor biregenerated at least once during their Division incarnations and one of his incarnations somehow went evil and became The Master. Perhaps the Division planned to memory-wipe both of them and one of them either escaped or the memory-wipe went wrong and corrupted their personality. Oh and the Master eventually becomes the Valeyard. 
But apparently Davies wants to say all the Doctor’s incarnations still exist in a mass Doctorverse. Um, okay. What’s next, is he going to say they never actually learned how to duplicate the Timeless Child’s regenerations and that all the Time Lords are biregenerated copies of the original Doctor with mindwipes/personality implants? I certainly hope not.
Do you suppose this in any way reinterprets the Fourth->Fifth’s regeneration, where Fourth was stalked by a white shadowy figure that joined with him during the actual transformation? And is this in any way potentially related to the Master’s techno-trick of turning all humanity into copies of himself?
(it’s just a show, I should really just relax)
What I do know is that Davies seemingly won’t allow Doctor Who to not be The David Tennant Show until one of them dies.
It does seem like they’re going to keep Tennant in their back pocket for potential guest appearances. I mean, you gotta do something BIG for the season finales, don’t you?
Between Kate Stewart, Mel (OMG, it’s Mel!), Donna with twice the offered salary and five weeks vacation, Shirley, and that weird robot thing whose name I can’t remember, it seems all but certain that they’re planning a UNIT spin-off.
Sending Wilf off “to be safe” at the beginning of the episode was pretty awkwardly done, but they really didn’t have any choice about that.
I’m sad they didn’t film him at the family table at the end, but that is how it goes.
Was Shirley the one in the wheelchair? Because I’m pretty sure she’s either going to be the next Master or will somehow bring him about. We saw her stand up a couple of times (likely an effect of absorbing some of the regeneration energy in the first episode), but she’s been awfully quiet about it. Also, I’m guessing that was her hand with the tooth at the end of the last one.
Honestly, along with the Daleks and Cybermen, I’d be quite happy never to see the Master again.
I thought her standing up from the wheelchair to get into her seat at the controls was just that her disability isn’t that she’s paralyzed, she just can’t walk or stand for more than a moment. Then when Kate took off her bracelet and said accusingly “I saw you stand!” it was to show how ugly it can be when people don’t believe your disability or think you’re faking it.
Did she say in a previous episode that she’s paralyzed? Because using a wheelchair doesn’t mean you can’t stand up.
Ruth Madeley, who plays Shirley, was born with spina bifida. While she frequently uses a wheelchair, she can stand and walk. This is likely true of her character as well, though we haven’t been told that specifically.
Not every wheelchair user is completely unable to use their legs. Madeley herself has talked about how media portrayals of wheelchair users frequently show no nuance in physical ability, giving viewers a mistaken impression.
Edited to add: Did everyone catch Tennant’s line on first seeing her? “Shirley, you can’t be serious!”
Well, his actor being deceased in real life was definitely a factor
Yes. Shirley was the one in the wheelchair. Her actor is also a wheelchair user, having been born in real life with spina bifida. Yes, she stood up a couple of times, crossed her legs, etc. because not everyone in a wheelchair is completely paralyzed, or completely unable to stand up. In other words, it was a reflection of what disability actually is in real life for many people who use wheelchairs.
Could she be a future big baddie? Sure, why not? But why assume that because she’s able to stand up? Or that being able to stand briefly somehow makes it “cheating” and “not really disabled”?
Before everyone goes off on me, I’ll point out that I wouldn’t have mentioned it except that they made a point of showing her catching some of the regeneration energy in the first episode, and Kate in her rant shouted “I’ve seen you standing” which was played for comedy but is exactly the sort of clue RTD loves to drop. I’m not accusing the actress nor the character of not being genuinely disabled.
This is an issue that came up before.
She also said that Mel & Donna were conspiring against her because they have red hair.
Anyway, Kate is the one with red nail polish, seems pretty likely that was her hand at the end.
FWIW I am with you.
The point of the spike’s impact was that those thoughts are in their minds. The major isn’t making up that deep down she has some distrust of the alien Doctor. Usually her intellect just dismisses it. Sure a wheelchair user may be someone who can stand off and on and the actor is in that group. But Davies having that said is still something to note. Possibly a red herring. A misdirection?
OTOH the hand will likely not be a new hand and who else can it be? Mel? Maybe?
Also FWIW I was least impressed with this one of the three. The Toymaker loses at catch?
The “something to note” is that the thought Shirley is not really disabled because she can move her legs is in her mind somewhere. It’s not a hint of something else to come plotwise. It’s bringing to light a form of bigotry that exists among many people, even if they don’t consciously realize it.
That article linked above is a prime example. Viewers complained about “mistakes” and “goofs” in the first episode because Shirley crossed her legs, and therefore wasn’t actually disabled like a wheelchair user should be.
Here is the only surviving episode of the Toymaker’s first appearance.
Imagine airing Sunday’s episode directly after that one in 1966.
Deleted - should have read all replies before I posted.
The Toymaker is a History Monk!
When the Toymaker says, “I made a jigsaw of your history,” this is supposed to mean that the Toymaker is responsible for various inconsistencies with the Doctor’s biography, including the idea he might be half-human (from the 1996 TV movie), the idea of the Timeless Child (from “The Timeless Children”), and, perhaps, even other vague plotlines like the idea of the Doctor becoming the Valeyard (“Trial of a Time Lord”) or the Doctor’s eventual death on Trenzalore (“Time of the Doctor.”) As Davies put it: “It just relaxes the rules to say he is whatever you want him to be.”
We enjoyed the new Christmas episode! Lots of fun! I like the new Doctor and companion. Some good questions from it as well.
I hope they can keep this going!
Looks like they are sticking with “mavity”.
The “mavity” thing is wearing thin rapidly, but the Gremlinsesque show was indeed a lot of fun. Although I kind of wish the Doctor had helped fix the flat before he left.
On the other hand we have a new mystery character in Mrs Flood, who is confirmed in a recurring, developing role. Anita Dobson is the new Bernard Cribbin.