Jump to content

5-5: "Flesh And Stone" 2010.05.01 (recap)


  • Please log in to reply

281 replies to this topic

#31

MariaArg

MariaArg

    Couch Potato

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 7:18 PM

I'm intrigued by River being a space-time oddity (I forget the word they used!). I also agree with the interpretation that River killed the Doctor, and I'm starting to think that's when she learned his real name.

Of course, that she killed him doesn't mean she's evil. It might be what was necessary. And it would be a nice symmetry if she killed him the first time they meet in her timeline.
  • 0

#32

jennifda

jennifda

    Couch Potato

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 7:24 PM

Re: Who does Amy love (pun intended). On Confidential, Stephen Moffit explicitly says that the Doctor is used to unrequited loved, but Amy was NOT offering that. She was just thinking she "had had a hard day, he was hot, and ... well, they had some time." He seemed to me at least to be saying there would be no love story going on from her end. He pointed out in the pilot, (and I am paraphrasing here) that Amy doesn't really have the expected boundaries and is kind of up for anything. Doesn't sound like that bodes well for Rory, but definately no Martha "I love him to bits and he doesn't even notice me."
  • 0

#33

sweetestsiren

sweetestsiren

    Channel Surfer

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 7:25 PM

I really loved the last scene, if only because I think it follows through on what we've only seen hints of up until now: how messed-up Amy is. She's comfortable lying (as we saw in the first episode), is pretty clearly commitment-phobic, and has a sexualized job. I think they've done a really good job with not making her issues in-your-face and giving us a very charming Companion who has a lot of great qualities, but I would have been miffed if they never revisited some of the more eyebrow-raising things about her. She's also just young...she has this connection/attraction to the Doctor, some of which is natural and some of which is probably coming from a pretty dark place, and I'm not surprised that it played out that way. And I love that there was an element of humor and ridiculousness to it, so it wasn't life-or-death or really hitting the audience over the head with anything. I was getting concerned during "Beast Below" (which I just hated on every possible level) and "Victory of the Daleks" with feeling that Amy didn't seem like a real person, but I think we're back on track with her characterization now.

Anyway, I really loved that episode and loved last week's as well. TBB and VotD seemed really unfocused and lacking to me, so I'm really pleased to be able to wholeheartedly get behind these episodes. I don't have the issues with River Song that some people do, and found myself really liking her this week. If I had one complaint, I really wish they'd followed up on the Angels "needing the bodies for something" as an explanation of snapping their necks rather than doing the time-zappy thing, which I think is a lot more intriguing. I guess maybe it was supposed to be explained by them needing the people's cerebral cortices for communication, or that they just plain didn't need to feast on life energy because they had the crack? That could have been a little tighter, unless I just missed something.
  • 0

#34

patriotickid

patriotickid

    Couch Potato

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 7:25 PM

I also think that River has met Amy "before", because as she is leaving, she makes a point of saying "See you, Amy."


If she has met Amy, she didn't tip her hat in the Tardis when they first met. Made it seem like they hadn't.


Beyond that, wow. I was literally shaking. Part scared for Amy in the forest. Part exhilirated at how awesome this ep is.

This is up there with Midnight as my favorite New Who episodes.


The buildup and pacing starting with Amy's unknown countdown all the way to the teleport save.

I'm not sure exactly what Amy was doing in her room, but hopefully the Doctor sorts it out.

And Matt Smith nailed the dramatic scenes with River.
  • 0

#35

devilsavocat

devilsavocat

    Loyal Viewer

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 7:30 PM

Speculation on "a good man":

We know River's coming back for the season finale at the latest, but no word on when her crime actually happens. I have to wonder if SM is just thinking really far ahead about how, years (?) from now he'll bring us to the regeneration of 11 into 12. Because if the doctor suddenly vanished in the middle of a crisis and River, for some reason, couldn't explain to everyone what had happened, I could see her having to take the fall for killing him. That would explain why the head of the Clerics wouldn't want the Doctor's younger incarnation to know that she was his own killer -- otherwise why would the guy care so much about the Doctor knowing who she was? Clearly he'd still try to save them all from the angels, right? And it would also explain why River wouldn't tell the Doctor who she'd killed; if she took the fall for his regeneration, he might feel guilty and try to change the scenario to stop her going to jail...

I also loved how MS kept closing his eyes tightly while he was trying to direct Amy what to do in the forest. Like her closing one eye at a time last week, it seemed like a real instinct in such a situation.

I was, however, still bothered by the fact that the angels often seemed like they should be able to see EACH OTHER and thus freeze each other like the angels at the end of Blink.
  • 0

#36

TheSporkWielder

TheSporkWielder

    Fanatic

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 8:02 PM

I was, however, still bothered by the fact that the angels often seemed like they should be able to see EACH OTHER and thus freeze each other like the angels at the end of Blink.


I fanwank it that the Angels only freeze each other when they look into each other's eyes. Non-Angels can freeze an Angel by looking anywhere on the Angel's body, but Angels have to have their eyes locked to freeze each other (IIRC, the Angels in "Blink"--which I watched to prepare myself for tTOA--were across from each other, so it works). Though it doesn't work entirely, because with that big Angel Mob in the Forest, there had to have been a few that glanced into each others' eyes, but it's better than "ARGH THAT ONE ANGEL IS SO LOOKING AT THE ANGEL IN FRONT OF HIM HOW CAN IT MOVE?!?!?"

Edited by TheSporkWielder, May 1, 2010 @ 8:04 PM.

  • 0

#37

voiceover

voiceover

    Fanatic

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 8:13 PM

in the new series men and women feel love and desire. After a certain point, just accept it or go mad.

Markeer! thanks for that. Exactly right. Down the whole Harry Met Sally... meme, that there is always something there, just acknowledge and go forward. That's one reason why I was in favor of getting it off early, then accepting it wasn't practical (nor, perhaps, desirable), and moving on from there.

With the caveat that I'm a WhoNewbie, and don't bear the burden of the past, and thus can unashamedly sail by the True Meaning of It All on the deck of my ruinous 'ship.

Edited by voiceover, May 1, 2010 @ 8:18 PM.

  • 0

#38

expelliarmus

expelliarmus

    Channel Surfer

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 8:39 PM

Seeing and Remembering. This is the thread of the season. Incredible long series of riffs right through both episodes on seeing, blindness, eyes open, eyes closed, and on remembering, forgetting, and the whole power of memories.

Speaking of remembering, did we get what Amy was supposed to remember? He told her a lot of things when she was little.
  • 0

#39

Marquis Carabas

Marquis Carabas

    Fanatic

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 8:43 PM

Speaking of remembering, did we get what Amy was supposed to remember? He told her a lot of things when she was little.


I think that basically as a kid she pretty much trusted him completely. Well almost.
  • 0

#40

OverrideB1

OverrideB1

    Loyal Viewer

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 8:49 PM

I think Override's underlying issue is that there should never be any romantic or sexual issue between the Doctor and his female companions, and since I grew up with the neutered relationships of the original series I can respect that, but in the new series men and women feel love and desire. After a certain point, just accept it or go mad.

It's not so much that I feel that there should never be any romantic issue between the Doctor and his companion (of whatever gender), it's just that we seem to be in an absolute anti-thesis of the "neutered" original series: every companion has to have some romantic feeling (unrequited or otherwise) for the Doctor.
Why is it that, in New Who, nearly every companion falls for the madman with the box? Despite Eleven's appearance, he is a near 1000 year old alien - what on earth (if you'll forgive the pun) makes Amy think he'd be even the slightest bit interested in her? Yet, in every series, we have a female companion falling for the Doctor in one way or another.
It smacks of lazy writing - we have this female companion who travels with the Doctor (because there has always been a female companion traveling with the Doctor - it's the mythos) what shall we do with her? Well we can't have her being a wall-flower like in the 70's and 80's so... let's have her fall in love with the Doctor! Brilliant, trebles all round.
It's almost as bad as the current concept that the companion has to be super-special in some way. Yeah, it's a tag to hang a story-arc onto but - after 5 years of super-special companions about whom the whole universe revolves - it's beginning to get a little repetitive.

Edited by OverrideB1, May 1, 2010 @ 8:51 PM.

  • 0

#41

InigoMontoya

InigoMontoya

    Fanatic

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 8:49 PM

Speaking of remembering, did we get what Amy was supposed to remember? He told her a lot of things when she was little.

I think that basically as a kid she pretty much trusted him completely. Well almost.

I think there's a lot more to it than that because the Doctor who said that to her was wearing his jacket and must have been from another time. It has to link back with young Amelia Pond hearing the Tardis return at the end of The Eleventh Hour and the duckless pond.

Edited by InigoMontoya, May 1, 2010 @ 8:52 PM.

  • 0

#42

TheSporkWielder

TheSporkWielder

    Fanatic

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 8:54 PM

I think there's a lot more to it than that because the Doctor who said that to her was wearing his jacket and must have been from another time.



Ooh, nice catch! I'll have to watch that part over again.

ETA:

the duckless pond.


And we get another mention of it, proof that the Duckless Pond is Important.

Edited by TheSporkWielder, May 1, 2010 @ 8:56 PM.

  • 0

#43

SunlessNick

SunlessNick

    Fanatic

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 9:08 PM

Possibly he wanted her to remember "everything's going to be fine," but if he said it himself, it might remind her of him also saying that was usually a lie to make you feel better. Or maybe it was that he called her fearless.

Or maybe it's something they won't reveal until she remembers.
  • 0

#44

TheSporkWielder

TheSporkWielder

    Fanatic

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 9:13 PM

Possibly he wanted her to remember "everything's going to be fine," but if he said it himself, it might remind her of him also saying that was usually a lie to make you feel better. Or maybe it was that he called her fearless.


My money's on "Beans are Evil." :P
  • 0

#45

patriotickid

patriotickid

    Couch Potato

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 9:17 PM

This is some kind of giant time loop isn't it?
  • 0

#46

Marquis Carabas

Marquis Carabas

    Fanatic

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 9:22 PM

I think there's a lot more to it than that because the Doctor who said that to her was wearing his jacket and must have been from another time. It has to link back with young Amelia Pond hearing the Tardis return at the end of The Eleventh Hour and the duckless pond.


You lost me, what do you mean wearing his jacket?
  • 0

#47

leela46

leela46

    Couch Potato

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 9:31 PM

I think there's a lot more to it than that because the Doctor who said that to her was wearing his jacket and must have been from another time. It has to link back with young Amelia Pond hearing the Tardis return at the end of The Eleventh Hour and the duckless pond.


You lost me, what do you mean wearing his jacket?


Me too.

I remember young Amy hearing the Tardis return at the end of The Eleventh Hour but I don't know what wearing his jacket refers to.
  • 0

#48

Genn

Genn

    Channel Surfer

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 9:32 PM

He lost his jacket to the angels in an earlier scene, and wasn't wearing it in the next. Whether it's a mistake or a subtle hint, I guess we'll find out.
  • 0

#49

InigoMontoya

InigoMontoya

    Fanatic

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 9:35 PM

In the scene in the forest, the Doctor leaves Amy to go off with River and Octavian. He seems to come back, grabbing Amy's hands. He tells Amy that it is very important that she trusts him and that she remember what he told her when she was seven. It's a very tight shot and indeed, when he takes her hands, his arms look bare but as it goes on, you can just see that he has a jacket on when only moments before he was without his jacket (because a weeping angel had grabbed it).

So, either in the twenty seconds available he ran back through the forest, grabbed his jacket off a weeping angel and ran back to have the conversation with Amy or...something else.
  • 0

#50

sweetestsiren

sweetestsiren

    Channel Surfer

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 9:38 PM

I remember young Amy hearing the Tardis return at the end of The Eleventh Hour but I don't know what wearing his jacket refers to.


I think the OP was referring to the scene where the Doctor reassures Amy before having to leave her in the forest. The Doctor had lost his jacket earlier in the episode when he got into that tangle with the Angels. Another poster observed that the Doctor left, and when we see him again (when he says, "Amy, you need to start trusting me. It's never been more important..." etc.), he's wearing his jacket. It's very subtle, and I didn't notice it at first. It could either be a continuity error, or something really important involving the Doctor time-traveling back to tell her that. I don't think we ever really had it clarified what Amy was supposed to remember from her childhood.
  • 0

#51

Blue Castle

Blue Castle

    Fanatic

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 9:50 PM

I think I'm living in opposite-ville because I liked The 11th Hour and thought The Beast Below and Victory of the Daleks were goofy fun - but this two-parter didn't really do it for me. There were some great moments, but I wasn't engaged. The crack-thing felt like the show was screaming THIS IS IMPORTANT - but it didn't seem to matter much because it was so sci-fi-y and not tied down to anything real.

The only thing that got to me was when both Octavian and River suggested that River killed the Doctor - and Alex Kingston was acting the hell out of the last 20 minutes of this episode. I especially liked her last scene on the beach because after the adventure finished, she seemed defeated - if she did kill the Doctor then these brief times with him must be almost agony to experience and even worse when they're over.

The Amy/Doctor scene was massively uncomfortable because I don't think Amy is attracted to him in that way, but is so confused that she wants to screw her father-figure. Inappropriate!

I didn't much care for the 11th Doctor in the first 30 minutes of this episode. Especially when he told River to "hush." Too authoritarian.
  • 0

#52

patriotickid

patriotickid

    Couch Potato

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 9:51 PM

Yeah he was wearing his jacket. Plus I think his sleeve seemed to be missing while the Doctor has his on.

Edited by patriotickid, May 1, 2010 @ 9:54 PM.

  • 0

#53

leela46

leela46

    Couch Potato

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 9:53 PM

Okay, I rewatched the clip and I see it now. That 's really observant, I have to admit I didn't notice him wearing the jacket but I see it now. I thought at the time that him coming back to Amy right after leaving was a bit strange but I just chalked it up to wanting to reassure her again. Clearly the scene was much more important that that. I love these little clues sprinkled in the episodes. I'm more intrigued now than ever.
  • 0

#54

Marquis Carabas

Marquis Carabas

    Fanatic

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 9:58 PM

Yeah he was wearing his jacket. Plus his sleeve seemed to be missing while the Doctor has his on.



ooh you're right I missed that. (Though i think in one of the shots it looks rolled up.)

Hard to imagine that being a continuity error. Nicely spotted guys.

Edited by Marquis Carabas, May 1, 2010 @ 9:58 PM.

  • 0

#55

Emmett

Emmett

    Couch Potato

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 10:04 PM

It's very subtle, and I didn't notice it at first. It could either be a continuity error, or something really important involving the Doctor time-traveling back to tell her that. I don't think we ever really had it clarified what Amy was supposed to remember from her childhood.

I don't think it's a continuity error. Even before I found out about the jacket (because I didn't notice either), I thought the scene was different and important somehow, but I didn't understand exactly why.

Have we discussed Amy's bizarre clock? Because clocks don't usually turn from 11:59 AM to 12:00 PM and also change dates. At first I thought it was just a mistake that Amy's clock read 11:59 AM when it should have been 11:59 PM (it was night). After all, we've all set our digital clocks incorrectly at one time or another (and usually oversleep because of it). But then I noticed the date. It advanced from 06/25 to 06/26 when the time on the clock turned from 11:59 AM to 12:00 PM (noon). That shouldn't happen. Unless it's a production error, it has to mean something. Maybe the work of jacket-wearing Doctor? A message to the Doctor from his future self?
  • 0

#56

Blue Castle

Blue Castle

    Fanatic

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 10:06 PM

Also, did anyone else think that one of the screens in the room at the end (when the Doctor was helping Amy move through the forest) had a giant eye in it? I couldn't tell if it was intentional or not.
  • 0

#57

lovemytvshows

lovemytvshows

    Couch Potato

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 10:07 PM

I also think that River has met Amy "before", because as she is leaving, she makes a point of saying "See you, Amy."


I don't think so because in TTOA when they were inspecting the Byzantium crash, River said to the Doctor, "Aren't you going to introduce us (her and Amy)?" So obviously that was the first time she's met Amy.


the duckless pond.


And we get another mention of it, proof that the Duckless Pond is Important.


This kinda reminds me of the "Bees are disappearing" arc with the Doctor/Donna. Donna first mentions it in Partners in Crime and then well obviously it meant something by the time we got to the reveal regarding the Tandocca Trail in the 2-parter finale.

Although I must say I'm not really liking the reveal that the cracks et al. seem to be happening around Amy. It sounds too similar to how all the lines in the universe happened to be converging upon Donna because she was of such importance. Now Amy's becoming like a re-hash of that Donna-plot.

Edited by lovemytvshows, May 1, 2010 @ 10:13 PM.

  • 0

#58

Marquis Carabas

Marquis Carabas

    Fanatic

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 10:08 PM

Something else that the clock has told us, is that the Atraxi happened in 2008, which means the issue date on Rory's ID of 1990 is well off. Hard to imagine that being a production error.

Also the day of the explosion in time and space happens the day of Amy's wedding to Rory? Something is going on there I believe.
  • 0

#59

Emmett

Emmett

    Couch Potato

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 10:13 PM

I don't think so because in TTOA when they were inspecting the Byzantium crash, River said to the Doctor, "Aren't you going to introduce us (her and Amy)?"

Maybe River was just trying to avoid giving away spoilers and was pretending she didn't know Amy already. I thought "See you, Amy" strongly implied that they'd already met from River's perspective.

Something else that the clock has told us, is that the Atraxi happened in 2008, which means the issue date on Rory's ID of 1990 is well off. Hard to imagine that being a production error.

Actually, Moffat has said that the 1990 date on the badge was an error. Of course, he could be lying.

Edited by Emmett, May 1, 2010 @ 10:11 PM.

  • 0

#60

Marquis Carabas

Marquis Carabas

    Fanatic

Posted May 1, 2010 @ 10:16 PM

Actually, Moffat has said that the 1990 date on the badge was an error. Of course, he could be lying.


Where did he say that?
  • 0