Doctor Who, series 7
Since it's been so long since we've had a new episode of Doctor Who, to say I was excited to watch the Series 7 opener would probably be understatement. ;) Plus, this is a big series--the Ponds, companions for over 2 years now--are leaving in what Moffat calls a "heartbreaking" exit. Truthfully, no matter how they leave, I'll be a little broken-hearted; I've said numerous times that I'll miss Rory more than I've ever missed any Doctor. I love Rory. Completely and utterly adore Rory. But I digress.
Warning: long and very rambly post ahead as I try to get my thoughts "on paper." Also, spoilers for "Asylum of the Daleks."
Moffat has said there is a clue (or maybe clues? I can't remember) as to the exit of the Ponds planted as far back as their very first episode, "The Eleventh Hour." I've been rattling ideas around in my head as to what that clue might be and what might be in store for the beloved Amy and Rory.
I know at the time TEH aired, much ado was made of Rory's hospital ID badge. It was dated 1990 or something like that--a date that could NOT be on the ID badge of young Rory in 2008. When questioned about it, Moffat chalked it up to "production error," but is it really? Does Moffat make production errors? I'm not so sure about that. Since the Weeping Angels are definitely going to appear in Amy and Rory's last episode, and the Weeping Angels displace people in time, could Rory possibly get sent back to the past by an Angel? Will that be his "heartbreaking" exit?
Alternately, the episode "Day of the Moon" shows a photo of Amy with an infant in her arms. Amy lost her baby soon after little Melody was born; Madame Kovarian came and took her. We know a young girl regenerated in New York in 1969. Mels later admitted that she regenerated into a toddler in New York. We know Mels arrived in Leadworth to grow up with Amy and Rory in the 1990s/early 2000s, but how did the toddler get from 1969 New York to millennial Leadworth? Could Amy and/or Rory be sent to 1969 by an Angel and actually get to raise their baby after all? At least for a little while?
Going back to TEH, the Doctor meets young Amelia Pond as a child. He tells her the name sounds like a "fairy tale." Later in the episode, when the Doctor returns to find 19-year-old Amy, she tells him that she changed her name because Amelia was "too fairy tale." Fast forward to "Flesh and Stone." As River is getting ready to beam up to the clerics' ship to return to Stormcage, she tells Amy and the Doctor that she will see them "when the Pandorica opens." The Doctor scoffs that the Pandorica is just "a fairy tale." River laughs mockingly and retorts, "Aren't we all?"
Through the course of their story arc, Amy and Rory have taken on somewhat epic status. Rory is the Last Centurion, the stuff of legend. Amy is "The Girl Who Waited." They have an almost sort of mythology about them. I'm honestly not sure how it could relate to their exit, but could the "fairy tale" line be the clue to which Moffat has alluded? Does it have something to do with their final story? I can't work it all out in my head, but somehow it seems plausible to me that they could be merely a story somehow--especially if they do end up being displaced in time by a Weeping Angel.
Finally, last night's episode--"Asylum of the Daleks." (Spoilers ahead!) I had watched the "Pond Life" videos on You Tube and was crushed by the final scene of Rory walking out on Amy. Just gutted. Amy and Rory are supposed to be constant--any universe, any timeline. They love each other and are together. At the very least, Rory loves Amy. What is this travesty?
The first few minutes of the episode has Rory bringing the divorce papers for Amy to sign. Wrong, wrong, wrong. And yet, when the Doctor, Amy, and Rory crash the first thing Amy frantically starts shrieking when she regains consciousness is "Rory?! Where's Rory?!"
When Amy is (supposedly) being converted into a Dalek "puppet," Rory does his Rory thing and tries to protect his girl. He tries to give Amy his wrist device. He tells her that if the Daleks convert by subtracting love, then by "simple arithmetic" he will last longer than she will--he has always loved her more than she loved him.
This has certainly seemed to be the case throughout all of their tenure on the show. Rory's love for Amy is truly the stuff of legend. He has been steadfastly by her side since childhood. He was there when her parents disappeared, there when everyone thought she was crazy, there when he thought she loved the Doctor, there keeping her safe for 2000 years as he guarded the Pandorica. In the alternate timeline of "The Wedding of River Song," Amy couldn't remember Rory, but Rory was there by her side, loyal to the last, willing to die to keep her safe.
But Amy is devastated by this idea that Rory could possibly love her more than she loves him. And it turns out that their marriage ending was not really what she wanted. Rory thought it was; she had kicked him out after all. But Amy was attempting to be noble. She could no longer have children after the events of Demon's Run. Knowing that Rory had always wanted children, she had attempted to shove him away so that he could have those kids with someone else. Honestly, it seems like some sort of silly martyr syndrome to me (not that I'm trivializing Amy's situation, but we all know Rory would always, always choose Amy), but Amy and Rory have worked it out and are back together again now so I'm content. The Last Centurion and the Girl Who Waited, back where they belong.
It was a surprise that the new companion-to-be appeared in the first episode--she was not supposed to show up until the Christmas special. Well, I say new companion--it may have been merely the actress who will play the new companion. Since the character of Oswin met an unfortunate end in this ep, who knows who or what the companion will actually be? The new companion's name is rumored to be Clara Oswin. One possible spoiler indicated that the Doctor will stand by Clara's grave at some point this season but when asked if Clara is dead will say something like, "It's more complicated than that."
Fan theories I've read have suggested that perhaps the Doctor will meet various members of the Oswin family at various points throughout time (all played by the lovely Jenna-Louise Coleman, of course) or that this character is somehow scattered across time with no knowledge/memories of her other "existences." So many delicious possibilities, really, and I'm thrilled to see where this season might be headed.
Plus, next week's episodes has dinosaurs! And the week after that has BEN BROWDER!!! Cue the fangirl squealing! ;)
Warning: long and very rambly post ahead as I try to get my thoughts "on paper." Also, spoilers for "Asylum of the Daleks."
Moffat has said there is a clue (or maybe clues? I can't remember) as to the exit of the Ponds planted as far back as their very first episode, "The Eleventh Hour." I've been rattling ideas around in my head as to what that clue might be and what might be in store for the beloved Amy and Rory.
I know at the time TEH aired, much ado was made of Rory's hospital ID badge. It was dated 1990 or something like that--a date that could NOT be on the ID badge of young Rory in 2008. When questioned about it, Moffat chalked it up to "production error," but is it really? Does Moffat make production errors? I'm not so sure about that. Since the Weeping Angels are definitely going to appear in Amy and Rory's last episode, and the Weeping Angels displace people in time, could Rory possibly get sent back to the past by an Angel? Will that be his "heartbreaking" exit?
Alternately, the episode "Day of the Moon" shows a photo of Amy with an infant in her arms. Amy lost her baby soon after little Melody was born; Madame Kovarian came and took her. We know a young girl regenerated in New York in 1969. Mels later admitted that she regenerated into a toddler in New York. We know Mels arrived in Leadworth to grow up with Amy and Rory in the 1990s/early 2000s, but how did the toddler get from 1969 New York to millennial Leadworth? Could Amy and/or Rory be sent to 1969 by an Angel and actually get to raise their baby after all? At least for a little while?
Going back to TEH, the Doctor meets young Amelia Pond as a child. He tells her the name sounds like a "fairy tale." Later in the episode, when the Doctor returns to find 19-year-old Amy, she tells him that she changed her name because Amelia was "too fairy tale." Fast forward to "Flesh and Stone." As River is getting ready to beam up to the clerics' ship to return to Stormcage, she tells Amy and the Doctor that she will see them "when the Pandorica opens." The Doctor scoffs that the Pandorica is just "a fairy tale." River laughs mockingly and retorts, "Aren't we all?"
Through the course of their story arc, Amy and Rory have taken on somewhat epic status. Rory is the Last Centurion, the stuff of legend. Amy is "The Girl Who Waited." They have an almost sort of mythology about them. I'm honestly not sure how it could relate to their exit, but could the "fairy tale" line be the clue to which Moffat has alluded? Does it have something to do with their final story? I can't work it all out in my head, but somehow it seems plausible to me that they could be merely a story somehow--especially if they do end up being displaced in time by a Weeping Angel.
Finally, last night's episode--"Asylum of the Daleks." (Spoilers ahead!) I had watched the "Pond Life" videos on You Tube and was crushed by the final scene of Rory walking out on Amy. Just gutted. Amy and Rory are supposed to be constant--any universe, any timeline. They love each other and are together. At the very least, Rory loves Amy. What is this travesty?
The first few minutes of the episode has Rory bringing the divorce papers for Amy to sign. Wrong, wrong, wrong. And yet, when the Doctor, Amy, and Rory crash the first thing Amy frantically starts shrieking when she regains consciousness is "Rory?! Where's Rory?!"
When Amy is (supposedly) being converted into a Dalek "puppet," Rory does his Rory thing and tries to protect his girl. He tries to give Amy his wrist device. He tells her that if the Daleks convert by subtracting love, then by "simple arithmetic" he will last longer than she will--he has always loved her more than she loved him.
This has certainly seemed to be the case throughout all of their tenure on the show. Rory's love for Amy is truly the stuff of legend. He has been steadfastly by her side since childhood. He was there when her parents disappeared, there when everyone thought she was crazy, there when he thought she loved the Doctor, there keeping her safe for 2000 years as he guarded the Pandorica. In the alternate timeline of "The Wedding of River Song," Amy couldn't remember Rory, but Rory was there by her side, loyal to the last, willing to die to keep her safe.
But Amy is devastated by this idea that Rory could possibly love her more than she loves him. And it turns out that their marriage ending was not really what she wanted. Rory thought it was; she had kicked him out after all. But Amy was attempting to be noble. She could no longer have children after the events of Demon's Run. Knowing that Rory had always wanted children, she had attempted to shove him away so that he could have those kids with someone else. Honestly, it seems like some sort of silly martyr syndrome to me (not that I'm trivializing Amy's situation, but we all know Rory would always, always choose Amy), but Amy and Rory have worked it out and are back together again now so I'm content. The Last Centurion and the Girl Who Waited, back where they belong.
It was a surprise that the new companion-to-be appeared in the first episode--she was not supposed to show up until the Christmas special. Well, I say new companion--it may have been merely the actress who will play the new companion. Since the character of Oswin met an unfortunate end in this ep, who knows who or what the companion will actually be? The new companion's name is rumored to be Clara Oswin. One possible spoiler indicated that the Doctor will stand by Clara's grave at some point this season but when asked if Clara is dead will say something like, "It's more complicated than that."
Fan theories I've read have suggested that perhaps the Doctor will meet various members of the Oswin family at various points throughout time (all played by the lovely Jenna-Louise Coleman, of course) or that this character is somehow scattered across time with no knowledge/memories of her other "existences." So many delicious possibilities, really, and I'm thrilled to see where this season might be headed.
Plus, next week's episodes has dinosaurs! And the week after that has BEN BROWDER!!! Cue the fangirl squealing! ;)