Review The Meta-Crisis Doctor

Doctor Omega

Member: Rank 10
Last edited:

Doctor Omega

Member: Rank 10
I think that this was a dumb idea and a waste of a regeneration.

It was obviously done solely so that David Tennant could return in years to come as an older version of the Meta-Crisis Doctor for any anniversary specials, much as an older Matt Smith can now also make older appearances, because it will be from at some point before he got really old in his final story. I am sure that they will pull a similar trick for Capaldi somehow allowing an older version of his Doctor in some way.

I suspect that Moffat only later thought "hang on, I could count that as a regeneration, which means, along with the War Doctor, I get to do the new life cycle! A cheeky bit of leapfroggin on Mister Moffat's part. He seemed to have forgotten that he had Matt Smith's Doctor regenerating on the beach after being shot, with no mention of "that shouldn't have happened".
 
Last edited:

the badwolf

Member: Rank 1
"He seemed to have forgotten that he had Matt Smith's Doctor regenerating on the beach after being shot, with no mention of "that shouldn't have happened".

It didn't happen that was a trick basically a light show inside the Teselecta the doctor never really got shot
 

chainsaw_metal1

Member: Rank 8
I really liked the way RTD wrote that. My two issues with that finale were as follows:

-As much as I liked seeing Billie back, I also really was tired of her being used. Doc, get over her! Rose, get over him!
-Rose kisses the meta-crisis Doctor, and you think it's all good. Then she hears the TARDIS leaving, and she runs to it, looking dejected when it disappears. The MCD walks over, grabs her hand, and she has this look like "Welp. Guess I'll settle for him". Just seems like a bitch move on her part.
 

ant-mac

Member: Rank 9
Please post your views on this offbeat incarnation of the Doctor that - along with the War Doctor - led to Matt Smith being the last in a regeneration cycle...
Just another reason to detest New Who.
A good idea?
No. It's another in a long line of crappy ideas.
A stupid idea?
Yes. Yet another incarnation just pissed away. Colin Baker: 8 serials. Sylvester McCoy: 12 serials. Paul McGann: 1 serial. Christopher Eccleston: 10 serials. David Tennant II: 1 or 5 serials. John Hurt: 1 serial. See a pattern at all?
Your thoughts please?
Another incarnation wasted, just so RTD could live out his fan girl fantasy of living happily ever after with the Doctor...

What I could really use now is an emoticon that represents vomiting.
 

Gavin

Member: Rank 6
VIP
In hindsight I wished it had been a proper regeneration. Imagine the shock of a Doctor regenerating mid story. And as an added bonus they still could have used some excess regeneration energy to evolve handy Doctor and had a multi Doctor story as well.

My understanding is that this was the story Tennant had originally planned as his finale before being persuaded back for the specials as Matt Smith and Stephen Moffat weren't ready to start. In that event I imagine that the purging of regeneration energy into the hand would merely have been a delaying tactic with the Doctor dropping Donna home memory less and getting back into the TARDIS before finally succumbing to regeneration.
 

Doctor Omega

Member: Rank 10
I wonder if the above clip is regarded as canon?

Does the meta Doctor have his very own grown from scratch Tardis?
 

Carol

Member: Rank 5
What went wrong?
Star Wars is a film (called Star Wars) - I can count to one - I saw it for the first time many moons ago (one moon at a time of course) and I like it very much. This "franchise" of which you speak means nothing to me, and Han, of course, shot first - how could it be otherwise? So nothing went wrong, nothing at all.
Family Guy and their purely speculative spoofs on apparent sequels is very amusing... but beyond that, nothing, nothing at all. So relax and watch Star Wars. Problem solved.
 

ant-mac

Member: Rank 9
Star Wars is a film (called Star Wars) - I can count to one - I saw it for the first time many moons ago (one moon at a time of course) and I like it very much. This "franchise" of which you speak means nothing to me, and Han, of course, shot first - how could it be otherwise? So nothing went wrong, nothing at all.
You're welcome to your opinion, however I prefer reality. The franchise once consisted of a single film, but that is no longer accurate or true. STAR WARS is a franchise that currently includes seven core films with an eighth on the way, plus several spin-offs on various forms of media.

As a child, I found the original film in this franchise to be as dull as dishwater. I thought that CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND was better in every measureable way. Fortunately, the follow-up was considerably better - but very few of the films that followed the 1977 original can be listed in the same category. On the whole, I still find the franchise to be rather childish and boring.
 

Carol

Member: Rank 5
I prefer reality.
Which is surprising, as you seemed to be fretting over developments in an apparently interminable science-fiction cashcow. Key word, fiction. Key implication, optional. OK, reject the alternative (pretend) reality I offered you by way of comfort and consolation, but don't pretend any of it really matters. A simple thank you for trying to help would have done nicely.
 

ant-mac

Member: Rank 9
Which is surprising, as you seemed to be fretting over developments in an apparently interminable science-fiction cashcow.
The fact that I prefer reality simply indicates that I want to be aware of the truth of a situation, rather than a fictional alternative of it, created to obscure or change the authenticity of the original set of circumstances. The fact that I prefer it does not mean that I automatically approve of it or like it in any way. I simply do not wish to exist in some form of self-delusional state.

It is that very same reality that might cause me to "fret over developments in an apparently interminable science-fiction cash-cow". I refer to the reality in which it is created - the cast, the crew and so forth. However, if there is "an interminable science-fiction cash-cow" that I fret about, it is most certainly not the STAR WARS franchise.
Key word, fiction. Key implication, optional.
Fiction is not the only thing that can be optional. Reality can be too. One can attempt to deny it, or avoid it all together. It simply depends upon how determined one is to accomplish this. Of course, that does not mean that reality ceases to exist.

As I previously indicated, this is not a goal that I share.
OK, reject the alternative (pretend) reality I offered you by way of comfort and consolation, but don't pretend any of it really matters.
If I enjoy a work of fiction, then I am interested in it and very likely care about it to some degree. This means that it does matter - at least to me. Really.

However, the STAR WARS franchise has never been in this category. I may have liked it a bit - but it was a very, very small bit.
A simple thank you for trying to help would have done nicely.
For what?

You have done nothing to earn one. There was no problem that needed solving.
 

Janine The Barefoot

Wacky Norwegian Woman
Never seen an episode of Doctor Who I didn't like
Carol my friend, if I were you I'd be happy with that and avoid this board altogether! There are other sandboxes to play in and this one often seems to me to be unsafe for the average "visitor" who comes by just for some nice conversation and happy reminiscing.

I personally rarely feel welcome or safe on this board because I only started watching the year CE became The Doctor.

But that's just my opinion and having voiced it.... I'm outta here.
 

Carol

Member: Rank 5
I personally rarely feel welcome or safe on this board
Thank you for the kind advice, Janine - and I'm so sorry some people have made you feel this way. Sure, interesting discussions can have heated give and take, but sheer snotty bad manners for the sake of it is both unnecessary and misplaced. When it becomes predictable as well, as you say - avoid!
 
Top