New Doctor Who Series Discussion *Spoilers*

I watched the mini-sode again this morning. I got the impression that the sisters elixir didn't 'replicate' the regeneration, it just amplified it...made it less random I believe they said, so 8 could choose who he needed to become. I'm not sure that that's the re numbering outer that Moffat has planned. It's too weak.

It was also said that he was dead already meaning he missed his window to regenerate (so it can't count as one of his) and that the Sisters had taken Timelord technology and perfected it. So this was NOT one of his regenerations, it was an artificial regeneration added after death.

-Nick
 
Actually I believe that 7 regenerated to 8 after he was "dead". If you remember. He was in the morgue when he regenerated. So I still think this is his regeneration. Moffat is playing semantics when it comes to the numbering. Hurt is not "The Doctor" but he is the same Time lord. So the numbering for the Doctor stays the same.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk
 
I think it's interesting that they chose to start the War Doctor out so young. I also wonder if that will be addressed in the special.

I'm also interested in knowing how much of the audios have now been canonized. Hell, I guess this means Susan and Alex are more or less on the cards now as characters that could be included in future tv stories. Not that I think they WOULD ever do that. I'm not overly familiar with the Eighth Doctor audios, books etc but the names he referenced in NotD were strictly audio companions, right?

Yes, those were all 8th Doctor audio companions he mentioned (Charley, C'rizz, Lucie, Tamsin and Molly). it's the first time anything Big Finish has ever been directly referenced in the show.
 
Honestly, with 2 to 3, 3 to 4 and 4 to 5 none of them were completely "natural" and depended on outside help. 8-Hurt is just as legit a regeneration as the others.


Also, disappointed to see the War Doctor's sonic is pretty much just 8's with a red tip instead of the classic emitter and a red bit on the butt.
 
I would love to see more 8 stories. I do think the night of the doctor was just the right amount to say we give the fans something they have always wanted but just enough that they want more.
 
Kinda makes me want to check out his audio adventures. Anyone know if they're good, or will I just be scratching my head because they don't fit continuity?
 
They're actually REALLY good, for the most part. The Chimes of Midnight, from McGann's 2nd "season", is some of my favorite Doctor Who over any medium. They're definitely worth looking into!

As for the continuity issues...it's Doctor Who. :lol
 
Seconded. I had never listened to any kinds of "books on tape" and one day grabbed McGann's Seasons 1-3. I couldn't believe how great it was. I went through those seasons at light speed. In some ways, better than tv...what with the imagination and such.
 
One of the thing Moffat has stated is that in his view everything is cannon since one of the plot points in Dr Who is that time is constantly being rewritten. In one of the mini episodes he has the Dr tell Amy people remember being at a place they never actually went to because time is always in flux and our histories are always changing. So I think this is the Moffs way of addressing the Big Finish stuff. So, in one timeline the events of "Dalek" or "human nature" happened to sixth Dr. But, when the time war changed everything, they now happen to 9 and 10
 
Thanks for the input! Once the 50th and Xmas are out of the way I may well check out getting hold of some 8th Doc audios.

Edit: As for continuity... I know that's tricky. I'm fairly certain the Torchwood radio broadcasts are canon, because they were broadcast on the BBC and have the full cast in them (side note, the last one - House of the Dead made me bawl my eyes out). I'd probably rate audio adventures performed by actual Doc actor and companion to be somewhere near that level.
 
Last edited:
It was also said that he was dead already meaning he missed his window to regenerate (so it can't count as one of his) and that the Sisters had taken Timelord technology and perfected it. So this was NOT one of his regenerations, it was an artificial regeneration added after death.

-Nick

I'm sticking to my opinion on this...the sisters said he had died, and they revived him briefly. It wasn't their elixir that revived him. The also said that the elixir itself could "trigger his regeneration"...not replace it, not replicate it, but TRIGGER it. They revived him and then triggered his own regenerative ability. They said that time lord science was elevated there..."the change doesn't have to be random" - implying (as we already know) that generally it is random. All the elixir did was bring on his own ability to regenerate and specify the regeneration itself. I'm still happy that its a proper Time Lord regeneration.
 
I agree completely. Its just not the time he's called himself the doctor or intended to be the doctor.


I'm sticking to my opinion on this...the sisters said he had died, and they revived him briefly. It wasn't their elixir that revived him. The also said that the elixir itself could "trigger his regeneration"...not replace it, not replicate it, but TRIGGER it. They revived him and then triggered his own regenerative ability. They said that time lord science was elevated there..."the change doesn't have to be random" - implying (as we already know) that generally it is random. All the elixir did was bring on his own ability to regenerate and specify the regeneration itself. I'm still happy that its a proper Time Lord regeneration.
 
I agree completely. Its just not the time he's called himself the doctor or intended to be the doctor.

Then how do you rectify the introduction of John Hurt as "The Doctor" at the end of The Name of the Doctor?

The show itself called him The Doctor! So that explanation doesn't seem to fit fully.

-Nick
 
Because "Introducing John Hurt as the incarnation of the Time Lord commonly known as the Doctor that did not use that title because of the things he did in the Time War" isn't as succinct.

You rectify it the same way that Nine was listed as "Doctor Who" in the credits even though that's not his name; it indicated his identity without being precisely correct.
 
This thread is more than 8 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top