Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Videos

  • 659378784.mp4

Downloads

Content

hi everyone!

here is my timed reaction to doctor who season 12 episode 10 "the timeless children"

wow this season finale was HUGEEE and jam packed with lore. im still grasping it all!!!

thanks for watching with me!

Files

Comments

michael moslin

Some fans hate this and say the lore has changed. Practically lore has been rewritten since forever. William Hartnell will always be the first Doctor, and that will always remain the same. Moffat introduced the War Doctor, retconned the Time war and nobody complained about that.

Joe Cleveland

"Assassinated presidents" is a reference to classic Who. And, as 13 says, the Doctor has had to deal with the Time Lord Matrix before -- again, a reference to classic Who. (I think this era has maybe more affinity with classic who than any other.)

Martin

This plot certainly gets people talking! lol I'm still divided on it lol Some days I quite like it for the reasons you mentioned but other days I'm more on the not, but as Michael says in his comment some do hate it, but I'm definitely not that towards it. I really like this episode, so much goes on, the master is phenomenal in this (such great acting and him and Jodie have really good chemistry) and it's an episode with so many good moments! So I'll always love this episode, it's a very good watch I'll just sway between if I like the change in timelord lore depending on the day you ask me lol And you finally found out who Brendon was lol

Joe Cleveland

The chameleon circuit is stuck on "our" TARDIS -- it's supposed to disguise itself for wherever it lands. So the TARDIS the Doctor flew back to get her own TARDIS disguised itself as a tree, and the TARDIS that took the companions to earth disguised itself as a house.

Joe Cleveland

The Timeless Child retcon really, really upset a lot of folks, as Michael said. But I think it is the perfect kind of retcon: it adds all kinds of backstory and raises more unanswered questions without changing anything at all about the Doctor's previously established story. So it's not a "retcon" at all, just more story. Some people say it disrespects Hartnell as the first Doctor, but how could that be? We haven't said that there are other actors who actually played the Doctor before Hartnell did. And in the Doctor's experience and in our experience, the First Doctor is the First Doctor, even if there were lots of regenerations of the Timeless Child before that. And the Doctor leaving Gallifrey and stealing a TARDIS -- that all still happened. Absolutely nothing in the show's previous history is undone by the Timeless Child lore. It's only adding more stuff. "Have you ever been limited by who you were before?" Nope. The Time Lords as a race built on the suffering of that child, built on appropriating what someone else has for themselves: it's a nice critique of empire and colonization. It's also a story that explores adoption: Chris Chibnall was adopted, and I'm sure he had great foster parents, but I think he's talked about the tendency to want to learn about where you 'actually' come from. I don't think Chibnall ever has. But it's a very interesting question: just how much emphasis and attention do you want to put on a lost or unknown past, and how much attention do you want to give to who you are today and who you could be tomorrow? Some have complained that making her the Timeless Child makes the Doctor too "special," but really? I mean the doctor already was shown to have special superpowers when 11 regenerated on Trenzalore/Christmas and the Doctor's regeneration energy took out the Daleks, their ships, and everyone else trying to take Trenzalore. (When I saw that, the persnickety nitpicky annoying everything-has-to-make-logical-sense fanboy in me wondered why the Daleks or anyone else would ever have been a problem for the Time Lords? When the Daleks and the Time Lords battle, just one Time Lord needs to regenerate and they would take out all the Daleks. Easy.) The Doctor has been a 'special one' since the beginning. I kinda wish that we could have had a serious of adventures where the Doctor discovers bits and pieces of the story of Tecteun and the creation of the CyberMasters, etc., instead of the Master telling us the story, but that would take lots and lots of episodes, and I don't want every single story to be so lore-heavy! I also kinda wish we could have delved into Ashad's cyber-zealotry more and his passion to leave everything human or living behind, but maybe there was enough of that after all.

Joe Cleveland

Doctor Who has always only ever been anything but consistent! And lots of classic DW implies that there were regenerations previous to what we know as the First. The Timeless Child is built on all kinds of precedent from classic Who.

emmereacts

i can definitely see how this mightve been a lot for some people. it felt a lot for me and i have not been in the fandom for nearly as long as the average dr who fan. but i do like it personally, i think it creats a lot of opportunity for new stories

D Scott Howard

Rule 1: The Doctor Lies. Rule 2: The Master never dies. There is quite a debate online about how many Masters there have been. 9 actors have portrayed him/her since 1971 (with the 3rd Doctor). But some count as many as 13 versions across the show's history. The second version was already running out of regenerations but always finds a way. Sacha's version has nice throwbacks to Classic Masters, with the use of the Tissue Compression Eliminator and their beards (not wives!).

Drake

the first tardis they went home with tarned itself as house, the second the doctor used tarned itself as a tree. you should know that a tardis has a chameleon filter and always tarns as something that fits perfectly ... our tardis just got stuck as a police box cause the filter broke xD