Doctor Who

[Farmer Reil]

Why else would you need to know someones real name?

Other than getting a mortgage i can't think of many other reasons.

I don't NEED to know the real names of Shawn Michaels or The Undertaker, or Mr. Lordi from Lordi, or Prince or Meatloaf, but I do. I'm not planning to marry or take out a mortgage with any of them though.

[AnnIQ Edison]

So is there going to be and ending to that episode or are we just left on that really annoying cliffhanger?

[ADG]

Why else would you need to know someones real name?

Other than getting a mortgage i can't think of many other reasons.

Well as Skummy said, maybe she's Susan Foreman. And if she's Susan Foreman and by extension The Doctor's granddaughter it's a good bet she'd know his real name. I knew my grandmothers real names but they were still Granny and Nana to me.

Plus I'm guessing we won't find out about their relationship just yet. During 'Silence in the Library' River said she'd been with him at "the crash of the Byzantium", "the picnic at Asgard" and "the Singing Towers". This week we saw the crash of the Byzantium, I'm guessing we'll see the other two at some point as well.

[Jimmy]

Yeah, next week's episode is the second part.

Another really good episode. Doctor Who just keeps becoming more and more fun. I'm a huge fan of the Doctor/Amy Pond combination. Though, I'm not over the moon with River Song. I find her slightly annoying, and her future relationship with the doctor ony interests me slightly.

On another note, do you think we'll ever see The Doctor's Daughter again?

[Benji]

Considering Moffat was the one who asked for her to be saved rather than killed off, I'd say it's a guarantee at some point during Moffat's run.

[Colly]

Why else would you need to know someones real name?

Other than getting a mortgage i can't think of many other reasons.

Well as Skummy said, maybe she's Susan Foreman. And if she's Susan Foreman and by extension The Doctor's granddaughter it's a good bet she'd know his real name. I knew my grandmothers real names but they were still Granny and Nana to me.

Plus I'm guessing we won't find out about their relationship just yet. During 'Silence in the Library' River said she'd been with him at "the crash of the Byzantium", "the picnic at Asgard" and "the Singing Towers". This week we saw the crash of the Byzantium, I'm guessing we'll see the other two at some point as well.

I heard Ascot, which I assumed to be just a picnic, unless theres an awesome evil alien horse episode on the way?

[ClaRK! Kent]

Sadly (as an episode of Who at the horses would be awesome) it was Asgard, of Norse mythology fame, where they picniced.

[Vamp]

Considering Moffat was the one who asked for her to be saved rather than killed off, I'd say it's a guarantee at some point during Moffat's run.

I wouldn't be so sure about that since the Moff later said that he was surprised as anyone to see her live and even more surprised when people credited to him. Apparently he just voiced his opinion that it would be too obvious to kill her off at the end of that episode and RTD seemed to get the impression that Moffat had an idea for her or something. I can't see her coming backreally, and if she does I really don't see it being for a long run really.

[Benji]

To be honest, Moffat has always been a supporter of lying to fans to keep things surprising though, so he might well say that to throw fans off too.

[ClaRK! Kent]

[9 to 5]

Yes. That was a bit good.

[therockbox]

Don't know if this counts as a spoiler, but just to be on the safe side...

Anyone else notice when the Doctor grabs Amy's hands and tells her to remember, he's wearing his jacket again? Gaff or will he go back and 'rewrite' time in a later episode?

Great episode, anyway.

[Frederick Jameson]

I loved everything with the exception of the last minute or 2

Amy trying to shag The Doctor it was so random if it had been built up I wouldn't of minded but to me it was more like they finished the episode and needed anther minute or 2 so just threw that in

As for River I do think they were trying to hint she maybe kills a future version of The Doctor but I don't think she will or if she does with him able to regenerate she will of killed him becuase he wanted her to as that would of been the only way to win whatever mission he was on at the time or something like that

[9 to 5]

It was a bit sudden, but if you think about it, when he appeared to her as a child it really messed with her head and she got this big complex about the Doctor. Now she is all grown up and just survived a massive trauma, it isn't that big a leap.

As for River killing the Doctor? Nah. They did hint at it but I doubt that that Father guy would have known that 'this great man' would have been the Doctor in that timeframe. Changes faces and all that, but he didn't know who the Doctor was and since no one knows his name I very much doubt that's what will happen.

[therockbox]

Didn't Rory say that Amy had him 'dress up as the Doctor' and stuff like that? They've been suggesting since the first episode that she has a bit of a thing for him.

[9 to 5]

That he did. I think the Doctor has been her whole world/obsession since early childhood, so wanting to shag him isn't that out of the question.

[Frederick Jameson]

Yeah I can see where your coming from but I still didn't like it much maybe it was just the way it was done

If anything to me it just made her look like a bit of a slag but what the hell

Also does anybody think that

As The Doctor stopped Amy from walking into the light in the end the twist will be to stop everything that what she has to do however in her case it won't stop her from existing.

It could even wind time back for her from the moment the crack appeared sp she will never of met The Doctor (if they only want to use her this year) or the same thing but she is the only person who remembers him and the events since it 1st appeared and has to wait again from childhood (and grow up again) for him to pick her up

[DFF]

I've stuck some thoughts down regarding this episode and the general direction of the series below in spoiler tags. If anyone's read the blurb for the final double ep, then it doesn't matter, otherwise I don't want to spoil it. (There isn't much at all, just for those who would rather not be told).

Saw part two of the Angels story on the iPlayer tonight. Great episode I thought, and it might be one of the rare occasions where the second part of a 'Who'parter (insert groan here) out does the first part.

Vampire's in Venice next. That can't actually fail to be good. Wonder where they are going to go with it all. The only thing I can think is that Amy has been displaced in time somehow (based on the blurb for the finale about a love story that spans centuries).

Does anyone else notice the references to fairy tales too? Tonight we had a few, but the Doctor also said in the first ep that Amelia's name sounded like something from a fairy tale.

Maybe Amy isn't a 'real' person!? Maybe she is some kind of fairy tale character brought to life by some kind of accident? Weirder stuff has happened before...

[AnnIQ Edison]

Great episode.

I'm glad that we got some closure on what time Amy lived in and dispelled the rumour that she was in the year 1992 or whatever it was.

I didnt find the last scene that out of place and it seemed quite plausible. We'll have to see how it goes.

I don't like that the fiance is joining the picture. I guess they needed another "Mickey" or "Rolph" (I think thats what his name was)

[Frederick Jameson]

Maybe Amy isn't a 'real' person!? Maybe she is some kind of fairy tale character brought to life by some kind of accident? Weirder stuff has happened before...

Could be but like one of my suggestions if that is the case then she will only be used this year as in the end everything will be put right

Edited May 2, 2010 by Frederick Jameson