River was okay in the library- somebody who knew the doctor, at least by reputation, or met him in a different timeline- that was okay. I don't know why they kept dragging her back. Apparently they felt she was supposed to be important, but either the writing or the acting wasn't quite enough to carry it. And the wedding wasn't necessary- I should watch it again, but it didn't add anything to the plot. Has the Doctor been married before? I'm wondering why the need to marry him now. Because for him to marry a human means he's going to watch her die, and he certainly knows that.
Oh, that twist at the end. Don't want to post spoilers, so I'm going to try to be general. Maybe I'm stupid, but why would that even have worked? The Universe can't tell what's genuine?
hy would that even have worked? The Universe can't tell what's genuine?
I think we're meant to understand that there's a bit of wiggle room - the fixed point was the Doctor's death...but what's important is everyone's belief, not necessarily the fact. Popular history doesn't always reflect reality, but the force of belief will somehow make it true (if you get my meaning).
I've had highly mixed feelings; there were things I squeed loudly about and things I hated. The wedding I hated.
On sober reflection, why was Amy executing Madame K more morally repugnant than the fact that she machine-gunned down a rank of Silents just a minute earlier? Because one was human shaped? Because one begged? They were all guilty of taking Melody and torturing her. So while I understand why they threw that bit in (mostly to reassure the kiddies that Amy didn't really commit murder) - well... I rather think that she did the right thing to Madame K.
The kids and I talked a little bit about it. I think Madame K was more morally repugnant because she wasn't physically attacking (unlike the Silents), but was tied to a chair and helpless.
Was it the right thing to do? Oh, yes, because that woman was crazy and unhinged and evil and she never would have stopped coming after them (also: stole Amy's baby, which would short-circuit my compassion motor, as well). Was I happy that Amy felt the weight and guilt of it? VERY. Not enough characters who show moral responsibility on television, to my mind.
Was I happy that Amy felt the weight and guilt of it? VERY.
I do admit, I'm happy that Amy wasn't "I killed a woman tied to a chair, tra la." But if ever anyone just needed killin' it was Madame, and I'm not at all ashamed about feeling that way about her.
Comments 7
Reply
Reply
Reply
I think we're meant to understand that there's a bit of wiggle room - the fixed point was the Doctor's death...but what's important is everyone's belief, not necessarily the fact. Popular history doesn't always reflect reality, but the force of belief will somehow make it true (if you get my meaning).
Reply
On sober reflection, why was Amy executing Madame K more morally repugnant than the fact that she machine-gunned down a rank of Silents just a minute earlier? Because one was human shaped? Because one begged? They were all guilty of taking Melody and torturing her. So while I understand why they threw that bit in (mostly to reassure the kiddies that Amy didn't really commit murder) - well... I rather think that she did the right thing to Madame K.
Reply
Was it the right thing to do? Oh, yes, because that woman was crazy and unhinged and evil and she never would have stopped coming after them (also: stole Amy's baby, which would short-circuit my compassion motor, as well). Was I happy that Amy felt the weight and guilt of it? VERY. Not enough characters who show moral responsibility on television, to my mind.
Reply
I do admit, I'm happy that Amy wasn't "I killed a woman tied to a chair, tra la." But if ever anyone just needed killin' it was Madame, and I'm not at all ashamed about feeling that way about her.
Reply
Leave a comment