Doctor Who Christmas Special – title announced… (SPOILERS. Well, duh.)

[si]

The BBC have today revealed that Doctor Who’s

clever twist on the much loved A Christmas Carol

will be called… “A Christmas Carol”.

http://bbc.in/d2fWqz

Topic

[ChrisM]

Sigh. I find myself thinking ‘Another take on A Christmas Carol?’ I mean, I like it, but…

On the other hand, being Doctor Who and the time travel nature of the story it could be very interesting. As long as they bring something thoroughly original to it.

[Danodin]

I hope it isn’t as simple as the Doctor turning up as the Ghost of Christmas Present, Amy being Christmas Past, Katherine Jenkins being the young ‘Belle’ to Michael Gambon’s ‘Scrooge’ etc.

[Seb Patrick]

Knowing Moffat, it probably won’t.

[Danny Stephenson]

Doctor Who, Sherlock crossover? I would really like to see that :)

[Ben Paddon]

Doctor Who, Sherlock crossover? I would really like to see that :)

No, no, a thousand times no.

But yes.

[Danny Stephenson]

I’m not saying that that would necessarily be for the Christmas episode, but could be fun for Comic Relief or Children In Need :)

[Ben Paddon]

It’d get people arguing over whether it counts as canon or not, and for that reason alone I think they should do a three-part miniseries.

[Danodin]

I vote no because, regardless of Benedict Cumberbatch’s views about playing the Doctor (he basically said he would never have done it), he really does need to play the Master opposite Matt’s Doctor. It’s something that simply has to happen. Well, if not the Master, some other nemesis.

[Ben Paddon]

Personally I reckon (read: hope) that it’s a few years before we see the Master again.

[Somebody]

Given that:
1) RTD scrapped the Daleks from End of Time after he found out Moffat was going to use them in S5 &
2) He wrote the Master out such that it’s nearly impossible to bring him back without bringing the whole of Gallifrey back

I’m pretty sure Moffat had no plans for the Master…

[Dave]

>2) He wrote the Master out such that it’s nearly impossible to bring him back without bringing the whole of Gallifrey back

Nonsense. You can bring him back at the stroke of a pen.

[Danodin]

It’s likely we WILL see the whole of Gallifrey back at some point. After all, Moffat’s hardly gonna resist taking up the thread RTD left dangling in front of him. Though IMO this is the kind of material more suited to series 7 and beyond…

[Jonathan Capps]

> 2) He wrote the Master out such that it’s nearly impossible to bring him back without bringing the whole of Gallifrey back

Aye, Doctor Who‘s a slave to logic.

[Jonsmad]

Enjoyed the extra time travel element in the scrooge story, but a lot of it was so fantastical that I’d have to say Dr who has flown the shark.

[Tarka Dal]

I think it was a built in fail safe. You can’t say it jumped the shark, when they put a cart on it.
Probably my 3rd favourite Xmas Who. I’ve seen some good reviews, but I thought the story was weak and Mic
hael Gambon under used.

[Pete Part Three]

Thought it was bloody brilliant. What The Next Doctor could have been if it hadn’t been bogged down by cyberbollocks. Character driven and smart. OK, so it’s the usual trawl through Moffat’s greatest hits (in this case, TGITF) but there’s not much wrong with that in practice.

The best special since The Christmas Invasion, and quite probably better. That just gets a nod because of the way DT was (re)introduced. It shits all over The Runaway Bride, Voyage of the Damned and that overblown nonsense from last year.

[Tarka Dal]

TND > TCI > ACC> VOTD > RB For me.

Seemed a bit dark in tone for a Xmas ep. That’s not to say action and humour should automatically come over character and plot, simply that I thought the latter were all a bit one-note and completely predictable. I mean as soon as the kid said “the fish like singing” it seemed apparent that Catherine Jenkins would be wheeled out to save the day.

Can’t wait to see that coming soon trailer again though. “Stetsons are cool” was probably my favourite line in broadcast Who yesterday.

[Carlito]

I think it’s fair to say Moffatt doesn’t have the same populist touch that RTD so effectively utilised (albeit far too bombastically on occasion). I didn’t think the episode had the ‘pick up’ factor for first time viewers – I sat watching it with somebody who had never seen Doctor Who before (and who likes sci fi/fantasy as a genre) and he was pretty much baffled throughout. In the interest of full disclosure, I kinda drifted in and out of it due to various Christmassy distractions and will be giving it my full attention on another occasion so I’m not the best qualified to comment, but that’s pretty much an observation on the Moffatt run as a whole anyway.

[Danodin]

I never watch them properly on Christmas Day, it’s not possible, even this year the quietest ever. As always, iPlayer is my friend!

The lovely Katherine Jenkins and superb Michael Gambon saved this from being a little…wet. A few ‘wow’ moments but the fish and various re-used/stolen ideas (Moffat ripping from himself as well as hints of Torchwood with the girl in the freezer let out every year, really Moffat should have considered ‘The Girl In The Freezer’…) didn’t sit well with me *sigh*.

Murray Gold – his best effort for ages. Yep, the series 5 Doctor’s ‘action’ theme all over the place but he did an amazing job of making it sound fresh, getting my heart pounding (though not as much as Katherine Jenkins did…)

Matt – outstanding, and even moreso in the series 6 trailer, which was awesome btw.

[Ben Paddon]

I liked it.

[hummingbird]

I’ve only just seen it this afternoon, and I think it’s one of my favourite Christmas specials. I found the darker tone quite refreshing, tbh. I felt that it gave the episode more emotional depth.
Maybe they took the shark thing a little too far, but I found myself enjoying it too much not to suspend disbelief that little bit further.

[ChrisM]

I only caught it today (spent much of Christmas day at relatives’ house with people making a lot of noise and a kiddie driving his new remote control car against my foot repetitively. Dinner was nice though.) and I had my reservations in learning that it was based partly on a Christmas Carol. Don’t get me wrong, I love A Christmas Carol, but it’s been done so much it’s drifting into the world of cliche.

Anyway, I decided to give it a chance today and….

It was wonderful. The Christmas Carol stuff blends with the story perfectly while making a lovely new story in it’s own right. Sure there were heaps of sentimentality… but that proved not to be a bad thing. It was both sweet and heart wrenching in places (often at the same time) and Katherine Jenkins has a sweet sweet voice.

I never did quite see how she got out of the ice box in the first place though. The Doctor on a suspicion she would be of aid? I hope so as that would be a bit too convenient if it were accidental. I’d also have liked them to have used a bit more imagination with their design of the fish. The very fact these exist in an oxygenated atmosphere and can fly around is proof these are an alien life-form, so it would have been nice if they hadn’t resembled our own fish species so closely. That’s a small criticism in light of the whole episode though.

Probably my favourite Christmas episode.

[Danodin]

After the diabolical notion that ‘The End of Time – part 1’ was in any way suitable for Christmas Day primetime BBC1, at least this year’s was Christmassy, and very watchable from a more casual or standalone pov.

In many ways I do prefer RTD’s brash insanity of deadly santas and Christmas trees, the Tardis flying down the motorway, Poseidon Adventure-like japes, people screaming and looking to the skies on Christmas Day etc etc. Though you could be forgiven for thinking 2/3rds of each of those specials were designed to make you want to take up cringing into your Christmas sherry as a hobby. Only the shark really brought that kind of feeling this time, and for that we should be thankful!

‘A Christmas Carol’ is still a rubbish title. Kazran hugging his younger self is also rubbish! Btw, did anyone else keep thinking of Matt calling Karen ‘Kazza’ every time the Doctor said ‘Kazran’? Nope, just me then…

Lastly…Oh my god, Katherine Jenkins. Oh my god, Katherine Jenkins. Oh my god, Katherine Jenkins… Right, that’s that out of the way. :P

[Ben Paddon]

‘A Christmas Carol’ is still a rubbish title. Kazran hugging his younger self is also rubbish!

I do so love it when you’re wrong.

[Danodin]

It should have been called ‘Katherine Jenkins Is In This’

[ChrisM]

A Christmas Carol’ is still a rubbish title.

Despite the obvious influence, I think I’d have preferred a different title myself but

Kazran hugging his younger self is also rubbish!

I disagree with that. It was a poignant life changing moment.

[hummingbird]

>> Kazran hugging his younger self is also rubbish!

> I disagree with that. It was a poignant life changing moment.

Shouldn’t that, y’know, break the universe, or something?
*cough* causality *cough*

[ChrisM]

>.Shouldn’t that, y’know, break the universe, or something?
*cough* causality *cough*

As I said, poignant moment. Although I didn’t mean it quite that way…

It’s okay, I think the Doctor Who Universe can stand up to it. I think it was Timecop which made that a big deal. Or was it that time travel series with Chloe Annett? Or both?

[Pete Part Three]

Or Doctor Who in Father’s Day?

[Jonsmad]

And Mawdryn undead that Davidson one with the 2 Brigadiers.

[Seb Patrick]

It’s okay, I think the Doctor Who Universe can stand up to it. I think it was Timecop which made that a big deal. Or was it that time travel series with Chloe Annett? Or both?

Actually, the Doctor Who universe has always had pretty stringent rules about it – google “Blinovitch Limitation Effect”. As Pete said, Fathers Day was quite explicit about it as far as the new series goes.

Moffat seems considerably less bothered, though. I can accept a rationale that says that Time Lords can get away with it (and hence that multi-Doctor stories are possible), but there was no reason given for why Amy and Amelia were able to touch in The Big Bang (particularly as you’d had the bit with the sonic screwdrivers sparking against one another), and the same with Kazran. It’s frustrating, as on the one hand Moffat is one of the most time-travel-friendly writers the show’s ever had – and yet that one aspect of it he just doesn’t seem to give a crap about having a consistent logic over.

[Ben Paddon]

I accept the Amy/Amelia thing because in the shrinking parallel universe they’re not technically the same person (young Amelia vanishes at the bottom of the staircase – shouldn’t Amy have vanished too?). I struggle with the Sardick hug, but ultimately I’m not bothered by it.

[TheLeen]

The reapers were eaten by sharks.

[Danodin]

> Moffat seems considerably less bothered, though.

About anything other than his storytelling, which is fine on one hand, but also infuriating. When it boils down to it…I suppose it doesn’t matter at all. Not one jot. *sigh*

[hummingbird]

Series 6 trailer: Does anyone think that the ship interior they show at 0:32 looks like the one from The Lodger?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpe1Ywz8azM

[ChrisM]

Actually, the Doctor Who universe has always had pretty stringent rules about it – google “Blinovitch Limitation Effect”. As Pete said, Fathers Day was quite explicit about it as far as the new series goes.

I stand corrected. Concerning New Who, (the one I’m most acquainted with) I found myself thinking “but that involved the unkilling of Rose’s father, of course that was a bigger deal”, but I realise you’re referring more to Rose’s interaction with her younger self. Or rather the Doctor’s statement that they shouldn’t! (Something I’d forgotten about.)

As a way of explaining it, I’d say maybe it wasn’t so much the paradoxical nature of the two selves interacting that could cause the problems as the fact this paradox is happening in this splinter bubble universe generated from saving a man that should have died. In short the paradox gave the reapers more power. I’m not sure it would have been as big a deal in the main universe timeline, although there might be examples in Old Who where this isn’t the case. (I’ve yet to do that ‘Blinovitch thingumy’ google, I’m basing my thought on New Who for now.)

I’m aware that’s probably a bit of a stretch on my part though. Actually that whole episode seemed a bit contrary to everything we’ve seen in Doctor Who (the new stuff anyway) as there have been a number of paradoxes that did not appear to cause the same affect with the Reapers. A great thought provoking story though.

EDIT- One Blinovitch google later…
Ah. I see what you mean. Kinda curious considering how often the Doctor actually met up with his old selves! I guess they refrained from patting each other on the backs…

[Seb Patrick]

>Does anyone think that the ship interior they show at 0:32 looks like the one from The Lodger?

Well, yes. It is it, clearly. I’m EXCITED by the fact that I thought it was going to turn out to be relevant to the series 5 finale, then was disappointed that it wasn’t, and that it’s now turned out it’s going to be relevant to series 6 instead. Hurrah.

Been meaning to do a shot-by-shot of the trailer for URP! at some point, actually – will get round to it some time this week.

[Tarka Dal]

I’ve a feeling I’ve seen Moffat mention somewhere that he doesn’t overly care about such continuity. Broadly, I think the point he made was that in a series 40 years old you would box yourself into a corner rather quickly if you paid attention to every established rule and that the series depends on re-inventing itself and it’s laws. There’s various elements that HAVE to be included, but plenty that he’s happy to throw away.

[Danodin]

It will be interesting to see if that’s the last we see of the psychic paper. Is he slowly taking the RTD-era apart piece by piece?? Well some things he can’t wait to get rid of while others, like the writing style for example, he can’t seem to shake.

He still can’t help writing Matt’s Doctor as Ten with a new head at every given opportunity… Okay he IS Ten with a new head, new everything, and Moffat has already said you write for the Doctor, not the actor, but still… the babbling speech after he falls out the chimney sounds like it was written for Tennant, as did several other scenes in ACC and during series 5.

It seems to me the only person on the production who doesn’t want Matt to be David 2.0 is Matt himself!

[ChrisM]

I think you’re right to some extent. If one were to read the script I think it would come across very like Tenant’s doctor.

Matt himself, and the characterisation he brings certainly differentiates this incarnation. The slightly gawky clumsy ‘old man fused with teenager’ style in particular.

[Danodin]

Not sure of the ‘stetsons are cool’ line. He is now saying too many things are ‘cool’, is he gonna say it about every single item he puts on? To be different, Amy should be saying it (and meaning it). Though maybe that would be too much like moving things on, development…and we can’t have that!!

[Dave]

>Not sure of the ‘stetsons are cool’ line. He is now saying too many things are ‘cool’, is he gonna say it about every single item he puts on?

It’s not a million miles from Troughton’s early stories repeating his line “I would like a hat like that”

[Wilbur]

Hey, rather late to the party (fashionably late?- God, I hope not), but if you take into account every ‘fact’, previously written into the show- I reckon you could get seriously screwed over, especially with RTD’s “This is the way things are” attitude to the whoniverse. I mean fair enough, he seeded the show for continuity he could use later, such as the Master’s ring being picked up [“I just put that in there in case anybody wanted to use it laster, although I never thought it would be me. But I always new it would be the Director of the Prison” WTF? And likewise, the two Timelords that voted against Rassilon being turned to satues and not being able to look at anybody, that seemed to be very much RTD saying “…And this is what the Weeping Angels are.” Cunt. That’s almost sabotage.

So in my mind Steven Moffat is entitled to take anything not previous laid down in his stories and say, “Fuck that.” Obviously some things have got to be sacorsant, but I can’t see too many viewers upset if they don’t have to google Blinovitch.

[Ridley]

Rabble rabble rabble!

[Ian Symes]

I know the girl in the top story on that page. Blimey.

[Alex]

The programme has been screened twice, including on Christmas morning.

At best, the reference was ­unfortunate at a time when talk of the Argentinian claim on the islands has resurfaced in the wake of the defence cuts here. (And just as Brazil’s new Left-wing president refuses the Falklands ­protection ship, HMS Clyde, ­permission to dock in Rio de Janeiro.)

At worst, it is something more sinister.

Oh fuck right off.

[Ben Paddon]

Dear Daily Mail,

Shut up and fuck off.

Love and kisses,
~Moxy the Bipolar Bear

[Danodin]

This is something else people can blame RTD for!!

Seriously, what the eff???

[hummingbird]

The programme has been screened twice, including on Christmas morning.
the wake of the defence cuts here. (And just as Brazil’s new Left-wing president refuses the Falklands ­protection ship, HMS Clyde, ­permission to dock in Rio de Janeiro.)

At worst, it is something more sinister.

> Oh fuck right off.

Tory government? Check.
Royal wedding? Check.
Falklands war …?

[Dave]

HMS Clyde, though

[Author]

Replies