zolac_no_miko | Requisite post-Doctor Who emotive reaction entry

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

So.

• Before Moffat started on his run of Doctor Who, was anyone expecting his Who to be gayer than RTD's? I wasn't. I AM PLEASANTLY SURPRISED.

• SO YES RIVER SONG well holy shit this explains a lot of things about her doesn't it?

• THE ONLY WATER IN THE FOREST IS THE RIIIIIIVEEEEERRRRRR~!!

• I'm told that there were many many Amy/River slashers. HAHAHA AWKWARD~! XDDDD

• HOW LONG HAS MOFFAT BEEN PLANNING THIS?

• So it looks like River probably will be killing the Doctor after all, yeah? I thought perhaps the guy she killed was not going to be the Doctor because IT'S JUST SO OBVIOUS I thought it had to be a red herring, but... well, yeah, it's really looking like River now. ...HEY

evilhippo WELL DONE, you got that part sort of correct a little bit! XDDDDD

• ROOOOOOOORRRRRYYYYYYYYY omg if I thought I could get away with it without being brutally murdered by your wife THE NAUGHTY NAUGHTY THINGS I WOULD DO TO YOU. UNF.

In other news I was watching Who with Mom last night (we've started season five! :D) and it occurred to me that the Doctor Who theme and the X-Files theme could be mixed together quite nicely. Just think about it: BA-DA-BA-BUMP BA-DA-BA-BUMP BA-DA-BA-BUMP BA-DA-BA-BUMP, do-do-do-do-do-dooooo~!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I am still gathering my thoughts about the pictures in that room. On the one hand: that's a classic tv/film reveal. "Hey, this used to be that little girl's room! Look, there's pictures of her all over! Oh, she's Amy's daughter: there's a picture of Amy holding a baby right next to the other pictures of the little girl!" So, if we're going by what classic tv storytelling dictates, then yeah: the implication is pretty clear that that's Amy's baby.

BUT: I don't know, I feel like I've come to expect more from Doctor Who/Moffat's storytelling. Because those pictures only work as evidence as long as you think within the bounds of a tv storytelling device. But the more I think about it: why would a little girl have a dresser full of pictures of herself and no one else? The one picture that does contain someone else (the picture of Amy with the baby) conveniently obscures the identity of the child: that could be any baby in the picture. (This show has definitely made me paranoid and turned into a weird Who conspiracy theorist.)

So, I see what you mean: it's definitely implied that the little girl in the spacesuit is Amy's daughter. But, anyway: that's why I think there might be some wiggle room for it to turn out to be someone else.

No, it's definitely not Jenny: you're right, she definitely wouldn't register as 'human'. I was just using her as an example of another little girl possibly running around the universe with the ability to regenerate. ;)

The Doctor, as we've learned, can pretty much do whatever the hell he wants. (He's a Time Lord! It's something about the third, time-sensitive DNA strand...) And if I remember correctly, when Rose crossed her timeline those big dragon creatures showed up to eat everyone. So: I dunno. It's hard to tell when they're bending the rules, and when they're actually breaking them.

And, if Astronaut girl is River, they've been in the same place together already.

This is one of the reasons I don't think it's her. (Because I am stubborn, and become very cross when the show doesn't follow all the silly rules that it has set up for itself!)

Those pictures are just the ones that come with the frame! At some point in the future Amy and her baby are gloriously reunited and someone snaps a picture and as it passes through time some sod in marketing somewhere gets a hold of it and goes "Oh, this is a happy moment, it will make people buy this frame!" Plot point solved! (What I'm really trying to say is this is the kind of thing that happens when Moffat gets it into his head to make everything all twisty.)

The more I think about it, the more

zolac_no_miko seems right on the crossing timestreams thing (timestreams, timerivers, timeponds?). The Doctor and Rose were fine crossing their own timelines until Rose touched her past self. So, non-interference with your past self is key (though minor interference in past events is okay. So I guess River involved in saving her babyself would've been not okay, but if she were to be involved in the kidnapping (which happens anyway), it might be okay? I dunno...) It seems like it makes sense for River not to cross her own timestream (and Rory does point out that last time the Doctor did it, the universe blew up), but she's also markedly absent (I think) from all the scenes with the girl, other than the mysterious lakestronaut scene... how involved in the events around your past do you need to be before it counts as interfering? (Because what's the point of time travel if you can't be in two places at the same time?) I think I'm just rambling here now, so I should probably stop.

No, River was also there when Astronaut girl got shot, too. And actually, that's the only definitive time they were in the same place... we don't know for sure yet that the Lakestronaut is the Astronaut girl. But I think it very well could be.

What I was thinking wasn't so much as "there" as in "in the same general place" but there as in "we can see them both at the same time." She and Rory were in the Silence's ship when the girl showed up, and goodness knows what they could've gotten up to, time and space wise, before everything went runaway-crazy.

Tangentially to Lakestronaut, I keep thinking about how they do underwater training for astronauts to simulate weightlessness, and I can't help but feel like that might be part of the explanation for why the astronaut was down there. But that also makes no sense, so I don't know why I keep thinking about it.

Ah, you're right, now that I go back and watch more carefully I see they don't actually meet. ...Well, then, good! No timeline interference there. ^_^

Hahaha, Moffat's got us grasping at straws. I JUST HOPE THIS WILL ALL MAKE SENSE AT SOME POINT.

IF IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, THESE STRAWS HAD BETTER AT LEAST MAKE THINGS EXTRA-FIZZY.

Hahaha, clearly I could be wrong, either of us could, but I think you're probably just being paranoid and over thinking. I think the pictures are what they seem to be. I mean, why would there be a random picture of Amy and her baby in with a collection of pictures of some other random kid? And honestly, regarding only having pictures of herself... this is a little girl who's being raised to be a weapon... how many friends do you think she has? And speaking of being raised to be a weapon... nevermind how many human girls with Time Lord attributes we think are running around... how many human girls with Time Lord attributes who are living weapons do we think are running around?

Yes, but with Rose, it was fine until she directly interfered... nothing happened when she and the Doctor were just standing there. And then when she was hanging out with her baby self, that was fine until she touched her baby self.

Tangent again! Speaking of being raised to be a weapon... how come human girls who are destined to be weapons always get named River? I feel like at this point, parents are just asking for it (though Amy didn't technically do it on purpose. But if anyone names their kid River from now on? They totally have it coming). (Either that, or Moffat is a secret Whedon fan and this is a very, very roundabout geeky nod.)

Hahahahahahaha omg I didn't even think of that! XD

The question now is... do I or do I not name my daughter River...? Would the badassery be worth the emotional trauma?

Your icons keep being so extremely appropriate....

It's a tough call. I feel like by using that name you're either setting yourself up for a kidnapping, or you're already the kind of evil genius that would raise her daughter to be a weapon. I'm trying to circumvent this by adopting... That way I'm not technically at fault, and I get to be a cool-side character. Probably some kind of misled but good-hearted part of the machine that's making her what she is, and eventually I'll cry and wave my kerchief as she goes off to be a hero with the people she was meant to be killing. Or I'll get killed spectacularly and that's how she'll discover her humanity. Either way. ~~I make adopting children sound like adopting a murderous cat from a sci-fi novel. Clearly it's not anywhere near time for me to take in any children.~~

I'm actually surprised I've had so many appropriate icons for this conversation. It must be destiny.

Randomly replying here, but what if the girl in the suit isn't the regenerating girl? Does river even have enough time lord DNA to regenerate? Or. .. is Or possible the girl could be river And the doctors daughter?

My smart phone is auyocorrecting shit.

Requisite post-Doctor Who emotive reaction entry

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject