Doctor Who - What do you call this?

Post Reply New Topic

I don't think you can necessarily pin that one on the time lords...

In the three doctors there was very strong opposition to the idea and it's stated like it's more or less one of the last moves available to them given the power situation.

In the five doctors, it is a time lord but one who is pretty close to insane at the time. Honestly, I think that Time Lord regenerations sometimes produce screwy mental results - (sorry Colin Baker but I think your doctor is actually a good example of this).

Then, in the two doctors - they're responsible for the second doctor but I don't think they realized what it would do to the sixth.

Actually, the two doctors is fascinating for other reasons. It would be much better if the offhand reference was about Zoe, not Victoria. That way you could surmise that the Time Lords sent the doctor off on one more mission before the mind-wipe of Jamie and before they forcefully regenerated him.

Having Victoria is different though - if they were able to pass orders to him, then why couldn't they capture him? I've a theory that they doubled-back on the doctor's past after they caught him.

gbollard, read up on 'Season 6B'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Season_6B

Ok fair enough, I always knew the scarecrows story... I quite liked it - and indeed I thought about it during the recent "human nature" story.

I'm not sure that I agree that Victoria comes back though... and anyway, it disagrees with Downtime.
I'd be more likely to either take that as either an issue with the Doctor or his response to a partially completed mind-wipe of Jamie.

Argh, apparently he gets Jamie back, but in order to cover up the fact that Victoria is gone, he makes up the graphology remark.

Even if the Time Lords have been wiped out forever, I still believe it's possible (and even probable) that there will be another "The [X number of] Doctors" episode. Anything is possible in Doctor Who, which is part of what makes the series EX-CEL-LENT.

now now quatermass, you know that if you kick David Banks style cybermen in the chest units they spew milk over you. Better to go all "ratson" on them.

ARRRRAAAAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHH!! ! *head explodes in a shower of sparks*

I have to say, the Cybermen in "The Five Doctors" were pretty pathetic. How can an entire Cyber-squad get wiped out by one gay gymnastic robot with arrows? Arrows!! Not even gold ones! What's up with that?

"They play too well" my silver arse!

Personally, I don't think the Cybermen have ever played really well. They come over much better in the books.

The invasion is fairly good, as is Tomb and the Moonbase (and for some bizarre reason I've a strange desire to see the TV series do a story with Tenth Planet style cybers in it) - sort of half-way cybermen.

But then from about Revenge,.... or maybe even from the wheel in space... they became fairly dull/stupid and fairly easy to break.

The ultimate arse-kicking came in doomsday recently.... Three daleks...

Personally, if I have any gripes about the brilliant new series it's that I keep hearing

"the daleks have no emotions" etc... when it's perfectly clear that they have hate - and a few other of davros' favourites.

and

"the cybermen are robots with human minds" - in the original series - until attack of the cybermen, they had computerised brains which simply didn't replicate the emotions. I also had a problem with REVENGE - (an emotion -= arrrrgh) of the Cybermen...

Ok... just realised I was ranting... sorry.

Good points, Gavin. Well, I don't know why, but I've always liked the David Banks style Cybermen better (except in this episode where they're basically "cannon fodder.") For some reason, ever since I saw them bursting out of containers and marching down the corridors in "Earthshock," I developed an Aspie obsession with them. And to David Banks' credit, he managed to make the Cyber Leader's character stand out from other Cybermen, which is difficult to do considering they're all nearly identical.

Not living in the UK, I missed a bunch of the earlier episodes, but I do remember what the Cybermen were like in Tomb. From what I know of the new "Cybus" Cybermen, they seem to be closer in design to the Tomb ones... fewer traces of emotion, more mechanical and robotic. "Revenge of the Cybermen" was a sort of turning point... from that point on they could experience pain ("ARRRGH!") and had more traces of emotion (or at least the ability to "imitate" it.) Perhaps this was inconsistent, but later on, I think it did something to emphasize the fact that the Cybermen are NOT robots... they were once people. Basically, they're "living dead."

Ok, point taken.

I was going to refute with the Gerry Davis introduction to the Cybermen in the prologue of the Moonbase novelisation (he's a co-creator so he should know) but then I noticed it said that they came from Telos and then later went to Mondas.... So I decided that if one line was wrong, the whole lot could be wrong.

Good clip from the Tenth Planet... I think that's the only story I haven't seen yet - because the BBC released the video AFTER I'd decided to never again buy a VHS tape. So now I have to wait for the DVD - and they'd better be animating episode 4....

I've noticed a few interesting things about David Banks style "Cyber Heads" from episode to episode. In "Earthshock," part of the helmet is transparent and you can see the jaw move whenever a Cyberman talks. In "The Five Doctors" when the Raston Warrior decapitates them, there's no jaw there, just a tube. And in "Attack of the Cybermen," when the Doctor takes the face plate off of a dead Cyberman to activate its distress signal, all we see is circuitry underneath. This has always puzzled me. Were the "Earthshock" Cybermen less converted than later ones? And is there any organic brain left by the time of "Attack"?

I don't know, and yes.