|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:36 pm
What was the point of the Time War if the Daleks didn't even die? They've come back NUMEROUS times and it's always "well those were the last ones" but we know they weren't. All of the time lords died for this cause but it seems to have done absolutely nothing. I feel like the doctor started off as this "hero" who sacrificed his people to destroy the evil menace but now it's just like....what a waste?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 12:16 am
what's the point of any war? also, the daleks keep coming back because of the fans. the director keeps bringing them back because everyone knows them and it wouldn't be doctor who without the daleks. it makes the show more worth watching if they bring them back. the audience can ask themselves "but how did they come back? weren't they all killed?" even i ask that question. i do agree that the daleks can't come back if they were all dead, but i still like them. they're the doctor's classic enemies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:03 am
dude, the doctor is always a hero because most people who arent obsessed with him probably only see like 2 episodes and they dont notice that the daleks show up in like 5000 episodes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 7:04 pm
My 5 cents on "the point of the Time War" (from a writer's perspective):
1. Wipe out scads of previous plot stuff so that new Welsh series could start fresh without having Time Lords getting involved from day one and confusing new fans.
2. Make the Doctor an endangered species of one, so he'll be extra lonely and emo, and all the girly fans will pity him and fall madly in love with him.
Which begs the question: O.K., he's the last Time Lord, and all his family are gone, but hey, the Daleks keep starting from scratch, why doesn't he? Not like the universe isn't probably full of chicks who'd have his Time Babies . . . blaugh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:05 pm
I read somewhere that Time Lord-Human babies can't happen, and that their DNA is more closely related to Vampires, unlike Humans, which are 98% related to chimpanzees.
He could probably have his babies with a plasmavore or something, but I'm not sure that there are any subspecies of whatever category thing Time Lords belong to; if they did, that species is probably gone just like with Neandertals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 9:08 pm
SarBear823 what's the point of any war? also, the daleks keep coming back because of the fans. the director keeps bringing them back because everyone knows them and it wouldn't be doctor who without the daleks. it makes the show more worth watching if they bring them back. the audience can ask themselves "but how did they come back? weren't they all killed?" even i ask that question. i do agree that the daleks can't come back if they were all dead, but i still like them. they're the doctor's classic enemies. Actually, head writer of the show said that as long as he's working there, there will NEVER be another dalek on the show ever again. i think/ know he hated having to write them in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 03, 2009 11:35 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 03, 2009 1:49 pm
lemurs366 Actually, head writer of the show said that as long as he's working there, there will NEVER be another dalek on the show ever again. i think/ know he hated having to write them in. Well, it's a good thing they have a new head writer. Wait, did Russel Davies or Steve Moffit say that? Because Russel is out and Moffit is in. surprised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 03, 2009 2:08 pm
XellosRei lemurs366 Actually, head writer of the show said that as long as he's working there, there will NEVER be another Dalek on the show ever again. i think/ know he hated having to write them in. Well, it's a good thing they have a new head writer. Wait, did Russel Davies or Steve Moffat say that? Because Russel is out and Moffat is in. surprised My money is on Moffat. RTD would never say that, his 10 year old fans won't be happy. Moffat is more of a "new monsters" fan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 03, 2009 4:18 pm
knightofthe21stcentury My money is on Moffat. RTD would never say that, his 10 year old fans won't be happy. Moffat is more of a "new monsters" fan. He is... but he'll also be approaching this with his "television executive" head on rather than his "fan" head. Moffat's also, going from every interview with him ever, unshakably of the opinion that 10 years olds are who Doctor Who is for. My money's on nobody having said anything like what lemurs366 suggests, and that she's got the wrong end of the stick somehow. Oh! Unless it was Davies up to a bit of mischief. I can imagine him annoucing that he's stepping down, finishing off writing his final script for the specials, and then giving an interview in which he said, "As long as I'm working here, there will never be another Dalek on the show again!" Which would be true...but sneaky.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 03, 2009 5:50 pm
knightofthe21stcentury My money is on Moffat. RTD would never say that, his 10 year old fans won't be happy. Moffat is more of a "new monsters" fan. That's a bit annoying, Doctor who isn't a "monster of the week" show. I enjoy the ridiculous ways that some monsters keep coming back. That's what kind of bugged me about Torchwood, sure there would weevals but other than that, every episode had a new monster, or zombie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 04, 2009 2:28 am
XellosRei That's a bit annoying, Doctor who isn't a "monster of the week" show. No, but it was often a "monster of the month" show. wink Through the '60s and '70s then recurring baddies were compartively few and far between and limited to the obvious few. The Daleks are the only monster we see twice in the entire Hartnell era! It's not really until season Twenty, when JNT switched the show over from being one aimed at a general audience to being one aimed at a dedicated cult, that you start getting whole seasons of recurring baddies Well, alright, I'm ignoring Season 8 here, but that's sort of a special case as it's more about making one particular baddie part of the ensemble. And, come to think of it, Season Eight manages to be very much 'monster of the month' anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 04, 2009 4:32 pm
I haven't watched the old 3-5 part episode series in a while. Anywhoo, I was kind of bothered by the fact that they had Dalek episodes so close together. But it kind of worked as a plot device.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 9:03 pm
Potential spoilers
Okay, so at the end of season four Davros and the Daleks have this plan to blow up not just his universe, but all the universes. Nothing left. BOOM.
Nothing left but them.
In their space ship.
Nobody to conquer.
No place to go.
WHAT IS THE POINT THERE????
Also, why would the Doctor offer a second chance to Davros but not the crazy Dalek? Crazy dude at least was remorseful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 10:09 pm
Salmay Potential spoilers Okay, so at the end of season four Davros and the Daleks have this plan to blow up not just his universe, but all the universes. Nothing left. BOOM. Nothing left but them. In their space ship. Nobody to conquer. No place to go. WHAT IS THE POINT THERE???? Also, why would the Doctor offer a second chance to Davros but not the crazy Dalek? Crazy dude at least was remorseful. Well that's completely key to Davros's character. When we first meet Davros in Genesis of the Dahleks he asks the Doctor what he would do if he had a vial of a virus that would destroy all life and he makes a comment about how he would have all that power. Davros isn't a "take over the world" character like the master, he's a "create chaos and watch the world crumble" character. There is no "rational" point in destroying all things but he just wants to know that he can do it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
