The Doctor remarks when he sees the Watcher that he is seeing a glimpse of his future. But that doesn't mean the Watcher is in itself the Doctor to come, merely that he suspects what seeing him means.
Adric does indeed say that but the remark has no context.
"The moment has been prepared for." make of it what you will.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
The Doctor remarks when he sees the Watcher that he is seeing a glimpse of his future. But that doesn't mean the Watcher is in itself the Doctor to come, merely that he suspects what seeing him means.Adric does indeed say that but the remark has no context.
"The moment has been prepared for." make of it what you will.
It would be away to get around that "no more time lords" rule you hold as holy gospel.
I wonder what the secret the face of bo will tell him this season?
It has been a long time since I saw Logopolis but I've always reckoned the Watcher was the mid-way point between the fourth and fifth Doctors. But why? Who knows (no pun intended)? Not a lot about the Watcher makes sense. Doesn't the Watcher bring Nyssa to Logopolis? Why does he do this exactly (apart from the fact the producers decided Nyssa would be a good companion one story too late)? Doesn't the Watcher also take the TARDIS out of time and space (which, given the last series, makes the invention of the Void Ships seem much ado about nothing)? I don't think a reason why he does this is given either, especially as he only does it for five minutes or so.
Christopher Bidmead was never the strongest logical plotter is probably the best answer to these questions but as for continuity questions about why the Doctor regenerates this way or that way or after falling off an exercise bike Ush is right; thinking about them too long will just make your head spin.
Originally posted by Eclipso
It would be away to get around that "no more time lords" rule you hold as holy gospel.
It's RTD who holds it so, not me, you know. And such concrete rules are meant to be broken. That's just meant to be the vibe, is all.
Certainly a three-decades old plot point is not going to be the means; it would be irrelevant to the majority of the auidence.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
It's RTD who holds it so, not me, you know. And such concrete rules are meant to be broken. That's just meant to be the vibe, is all.Certainly a three-decades old plot point is not going to be the means; it would be irrelevant to the majority of the auidence.
Who cares? So was Sarah Jane Smith. Hate to be the one to lift the scales from your eyes. But writers, directors and producers change their minds all the time and love to go back and use old storylines.
He could change his mind on a whim, or if someone on the writing staff writes a really good storyline for it. And they could easily explain it. Same with the Master.
That's faulty logic on both counts.
SJS was entirely re-introduced and was reasonable to do so. If you are seriously trying to compare an easily understood companion like Sarah Jane Smith and an obscure irrelevance like The Watcher, that says a lot about the mistakes made in your mental attitude towards this.
Secondly, yes, he could change his mind, yet you cannot simply use that as a reason to entirely discount things he has said. His clear statements here are evidence; "He might be lying" is a poor refutation unless you can bring forward an indication that this might be so. As it stands, we have more reason to believe what he says than not to.
And again, what they can or cannot easily explain is not the point. What they will bother explaining, what is relevant to a modern audience, THAT is thew point. That is why, if the Master returns, the mystery they will address is how he is still there then the Doctor was so sure that all the Time Lords were dead. That is precissely relevant to all viewers. The question will NOT be anything to do with the master being trapped in the TARDIS, because that would require a huge amouhnt of exposition to explain to a modern audience and is not relevant to them at all.
You still need to learn.
No YOU need to learn. There has been many instances in the past of writers directors and producers saying they will stick to a perticular restriction on their shows only to change it.
And it doesn't take that much to exlpian ethier of them.
The Watcher- A possible future incarnation of the Doctor.
The Master- Sucked into the TARDIS, hence trapped during the Time War.
See that's not hard at all. Just cause you wouldn't be happy with those simple explanations doesn't mean others wouldn't.
But no-one reasonable would think these are good and appropriate things to try and pointlessly yank into the new series, like you would. It would alienate anyone other than the diehard fans, which is not how they do it. And good lord, just spontaneously declaring that the Watcher is the Doctor from the future... makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Have you even watched Logopolis lately? You clearly don't know what you are talking about. Which seems to be par for the course.
As for "people have changed their minds", that's just you not even doing the courtesy of reading what I said.
You really need to get a grip on how all this works. I'm sorry, but you really are still flailing like a fanboy.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
But no-one reasonable would think these are good and appropriate things to try and pointlessly yank into the newe series, like you would. it would alienate anyone other than the diehard fans, which is not how they do it.As for "people have changed their minds", that's just you not even doing the courtesy of reading what I said.
You really need to get a grip on how all this works. I'm sorry, but you really are still flailing like a fanboy.
Your acting more like a fanboy or super-geek then me. I read what you wrote, I don't agree with you. I can do the first and not agree with you.
No offense most audiences don't really care that much. They would accept it allot easier then you would.
I think your main issue is you don't get that the rest of the world doesn't think the same way you do.
"The Watcher- A possible future incarnation of the Doctor he met once.
The Master- Sucked into the TARDIS, hence trapped during the Time War."
There is nothing wrong with ethier of those explaniations.
No, I am acting like someone who knows what they are talking about. You are simply trying to project your own rabid imaginations onto the show and pretend they are good ideas. Completely contextless references to the old show, done in a major fashion, DO alienate audiences.
The problem with the second point is that that entire plotline is completely irrelevant to a new audience. you have to get that through your head. The Master has to be entirely re-introduced from scratch for a new audience- entirely forget about whaty happened in past stories.
The problem with the first point is that you have clearly never seen Logopolis and you are making things up based on what you have read here, which is contemptible.
The Watcher merges with the Doctor during his fourth regeneration and stops existing.
That is why he is not a future Doctor and that is why it is entirely useless to try and make out it allows Time Lords to still exist after the Time War, an idea so obscure you appeared to just be babbling when you said that one.
I suggest you actually try and have some idea about what you are talking about before you say anything, because you have annihilated your own credibility there.
Your right I know very little about The Watcher.
But I do know about The Master. And it would be very simple to explain.
He ran out of regenerations and tried to use the TARDIS to steal the Doctor's and got pulled into it.
This also brings up the oppertunity to explain about what happens after a Time Lord has run out of regenerations.
They explained the Cyber-men and the Daleks easily enough. The Master wouldn't be much more difficult.
You need to get out of your own personal bubble and understand most audiences will take whatever is thrown at them as long as it is entertaining and well written.
Err, except they didn;t explain the Cybermen, did they? Thet did exactly what I just said and completely remade them for a new audience, with a different origin and a different reason for existing. They did this precisely because the old continuity was so archaic and confusing.
And what have they done with the Daleks other than say they were a vicious race that the Doctor thought he had killed?
By your logic, they should have been trying to explain why Daleks are still around after Evil of the Daleks, where the Doctor wiped out the Dalek race, or Rememberance of the Daleks, where the Doctor destroyed their homeworld.
But they didn't do any of that. None of it at all. They made up an entirely new plot for the new series- the Time War- and ALL explanations for the Daleks in the new series have come from that.. Except for the look and the sound effects, there is no plot continuity between new and old Daleks at all, because that would just confuse new viewers.
So thank you very much for providing examples which give me the opportunity to explain precisely why you are wrong. The only one in his personal bubble is you.
There is absolutely no need to go through the entire plot of the 1996 tv movie to mess around trying to talk about hwo the Master got out the TARDIS -when there isn't even any notion of him being trapped there, that was meant to be him dying, as he so often dies- because it would just bore and alienate.
All you need for the new series is:
1. The Master is an evil Time Lord
2. He survived the Time War by (insert new plotline for the new series here)
It is absolutely consistent with what they have done before and what they have said for things to go like this. You have nothing to back your position except your own very fallible opinion, which you have already shown to be worthless after that whole Watcher debacle above, which everyone can see you were trying to talk authoritatively about, and claim you were right and I was wrong, when you actually didn't even know what the hell the Watcher was, hadn't seen seen the story he was in, or didn't even have any inkling of its existence before you read the name in this thread. So who the heck can have respect for anythong you say now, now you have been exposed as such a fraud?
Geez.
Wow, you really can't make a counter arugment without petty insults can you? (This is what i love about fanboys) Try talking more objectively.
They did explain the other Cyber-men, he explained how the same thing happened in the normal reality only that they spread across the galaxy.
As for the Daleks, since they have been wiped out more then once and they keep comming back so no real need for explanation there. He explained Davros as just "A madman in charge of his own little world", didn't need anymore then that.
Same with The Master, It's a simple way to explain it.
The Time War is refferenced from books featuring the 8th Doctor who first appeared in the 1996 movie.
Try to make your arguements without petty insults.
One thing he doesn't realzie is that The Master is no longer a Time Lord. He has run through his regeneration cycle and is now a pile of goop that can possess bodies.
I understand how Ushgarak would like to see him intergrated in the new storyline. But since the Time Way is based off of the 8th Doctor books, and the 8th Doctor first appeared in the 1996 movie it makes sense to follow that storyline which can easily be explained as I have shown. (By using far less petty insults then he has)
Now nethier of us really knows how the show would choose to intergrate The Master. We are just offering our different ideas on how it would be done. Unlike him, however I seem to be able to understand and accept other people's ideas. He seems to think that means I have to agree with him, which it does not.
Personally I would be happy just to have The Master back as he is a very interesting character and it would be nice to show that not all Timelords are as moral as The Doctor.
And Ushgarak, I have no problem debating with you but I could do without the childish insults.
I really, really don't understand this claim that the Master is no longer a Time Lord. 'Time Lord' isn't a title or anything like that, it's an alien race. You don't STOP being one, just as someone doesn't stop being human or a cat stop being a cat.
Are books even considered canon at all? I really would doubt it. And it's not like DW has a straightforward or sensical continuity.
And you don't think that tying plot stuff from the new series to the old will alienate the audience, Eclipso? Right, well here's the opinion of someone who is very new to DW and is most familiar with the new series and has only seen a handful of the classic episodes. I would rather the new series NOT be so tied to the old, because frankly, I would not want to have to find out what the relevant episodes are and watch them in order to understand what's going on, and rushed/half-explained backgrounds tend to confuse more than help. Much better to keep it seperate, as far as I'm concerned. If the Master does return in the new series I am very sure it will be as Ush says, in that it will be explained and played out in a new plotline completely seperate from the old one, because if you go "oh he survived because he was a blob of goop" and not explain anything else, people will be disappointed; and they wouldn't reasonably be able to explain everything either. Far better to start it afresh.
That's your opinion, and you have every right to feel that way, and it's nice that you can express it without childish remarks.
I belive that they can integrate in the character of The Master without much difficulty. When they brought in Sarah Jane Smith you didn't have to go back and watch the old episodes did you?
If they do change it so that The Master is a Time Lord again it will alienate allot of older fans who make up the fan base of the show. So it's a no win situation so you might as well keep with established history of the character which is in a movie which introduces the 8th Doctor which is based around the Time War which the new series is heavily based around.
I'm not asking you to agree with me, you have the right to your opinion just as (and Ush might wanna take notes on this) I have the right to my own. You don't have to agree with it, just respect that it is my opinion.
Since it is obvious that nethier of us is likely to agree with the other, and we have examined all sides of this. There really is no point in going further.
Now I expect there will be a counter post to this tommorow with lots of insults and redicule. So I will sit back and await the inevitable.