The Doctor’s Companion Ep. 21 – Eyes Wide Shut
Monday, May 3rd, 2010
Scott and Randy anxiously return to discuss the conclusion to “The Time of Angels”, the fifth episode of series 5 “Flesh and Stone”. The Doctor’s plan to save the crew from the Weeping Angels surrounding them succeeds, but they all find more then they bargain for at the heart of the Byzantium. Amy’s run in with an Angel is still causing her problems, and the mystery of River Song begins to unravel. Will the Doctor be able to save Amy from certain doom? What is River hiding from the Doctor? And what nefarious plans does Amy have waiting for the Doctor in her bedroom? Find out, in the newest episode of The Doctor’s Companion! And remember, BEWARE OF SPOILERS!!
Next Week: Vampire in Venice!!
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Posted By:
15 Comments
Subscribe to Comments FeedLeave a Reply
Book of the Month
Y The Last Man Vol. 5In this final Deluxe Edition hardcover collecting Y #49-60, Yorick and Agent 355 prepare for their ultimate quest to reunite the last man with his lost love, while the person, people or thing behind the disaster that wiped out half of humanity is revealed. Then, Yorick Brown's long journey through an Earth populated only by women comes to its dramatic, unexpected conclusion.
There is something interesting that I realize recently when you guys talked about the Doctor never getting his jacket back. As it happens when The Doctor came back to talk with Amy while Amy had his eyes closed he had his jacket. I am not sure if that was a mistake in editing or if it is related to some timey wimey thing that will occur eventually. It is interesting nevertheless, I can’t wait for next week.
Maybe Amy had some adventures with the Doctor while she was a little girl but she forgot. Maybe the dream she had back on the first episode was real.
they timey wimey’d it back when they made the angels go away, like with the clerics.
Yes, but it as only after those seconds (during his talk with Amy) that the Doctor had his jacked, afterwards when he was back with River and Bishop he didn’t had one. Could it be that the Doctor itself was able to go back in time and tell that to Amy therefore changing his own timeline. Maybe that is why he says at the end that time can be re-written. This opens so many possibilities if it were true :P
I think my favorite bit of the Confidential was finding out that Matt and Karen named their make-out scene.
(Exaggerated voices, together) “SMOOCHIE-SMOOCHIE TIME!”
Watching the two actors bounce off each other off-camera is just as fun as watching the Doctor and Amy. I hope the writers are paying attention and take advantage of the actors’ friendship in future Doctor/Amy conversations.
One scen that stood out for me was and I’m trying to remember it off the top of my head so bar with it:
ANGEL BOB: we will take this world and the rest of the universe and make the stars burn sir
DCOTOR: . . .yeah but we have comfy chairs
ANGEL BOB: we have no need for comfy chairs sir we just. . .
DOCTOR: Ha made him say comfy chairs
Hmmm. Yeah the Doctor losing the coat. I really wanted him to mention it near the end of the episode and go back into the TARDIS and look out the Tennant “hero trench coat”. . .really did love that coat. Never did get destroyed or anything he just sort of threw it to the side before he regenorated. Sure I read somewhere that Tennent got to actually keep it after he left.
Anyone else think that the person River kiled is Jack Harkness. . .its the only thing I could come up with that would suit the “best man I’ve ever met” no chance she killed The Doctor and Jack is the only other person I can come up with that would come close so far (that we’ve met yet anyway) that and we are “supposed” to like River as The Docotrs wife and what not so this way the death is a by back but perhaps she never knew he could come back to life as he does. . .
Any other views??? :)
Why couldn’t she kill the Doctor? At the very least, she could “kill” him and he’d regenerate. I’m not saying it’s the most feasible or interesting interpretation of what we know at the moment. I’m just saying it could be a possibility.
Personally, I don’t think that is what will happen because it seems like that’s what they want you to think with the way they did that scene. Same thing with River being married to the Doctor. It’s almost like it’s too obvious, and they are setting it up one way in order to pull the rug out from under us later.
As a fan of Douglas Adams, I was thinking that perhaps the Weeping Angels have a little bit of Bugblatter Beast in their DNA. The Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal is so mind-bogglingly stupid that it assumes that if someone cannot see it, then it cannot see the person. There seemed to be a little bit of this kind of logic going on in this episode.
I didn;t find it hard to understand the whole, act like you can see thing, because that shows just how distracted, afraid, and fascinated the Weeping angels were by the cracks in time.
As far as the Bugblatter Beast, while watching the episode, I was curious whether throwing a towel over Amy’s head would help her at all. I laughed a little bit. Glad to see I’m not the only one.
It shouldn’t matter whether or not they are distracted. The weeping angels literally cannot exist as long as they can be seen. That implies that they are not turning to stone on their own free will.
Take for instance The Gargoyles (from the cartoon). When the sun rises, they turn to stone. If you were to fool them into thinking the sun was rising, they may rush to get prepared to turn to stone. But it wouldn’t actually happen.
I could see with the Angels, that they may say, “Oh God! Someone can see us! We are going to be turned to stone! ….Wait….I’m not actually turned to stone”. It’s almost as if they can’t determine whether or not the act is voluntary.
I get what you’re saying with the comparison to Gargoyles, but how do you show that visually with creatures that cannot talk? Sure, Angel Bob can talk over the radio, but definitely wouldn’t have worked in a “Oh crap she can see us!” kind of way.
I think Moffat decided that he wanted to get Amy wandering through a bunch of Angels with her eyes closed because that is really scary idea, especially for kids. Then he tried his hardest to come up with an explanation for it and came up a little bit short under scrutiny. However, it still completely works as far as the “creepy” factor goes.
great show!
Don’t know if I missed this in discussion, but the Wedding day date; 26 June 2010, this is a Saturday so it looks like the Wedding episode may be in ‘real’ time.
I thought that the energy from the crack kind of drew the soldiers to it, against their will. But I have no evidence, I just thought that (explaining why they left her, pretty creepy actually, and I really liked it).
I wonder if River killed the Doctor, and she’s married to a different Doctor (not Matt Smith)? I know this isn’t original though, hehe. Impulse thought!
Smith and Gillan are so great together aren’t they? Definitely, they’re my favorite Doctor/Companion combo (though Tennant is still, so far, my favorite Doctor; Smith is closing in though buddy, hehe).
Can I just say, as a long time ER fan, I do really love Alex Kingston.
I don’t mind the “drawing them in” explanation. However, nobody else seemed to have that reaction. The Angels ran, Amy was just shocked. River, The Doctor, and the Father were all content with walking away. Obviously they gave the line that time travelers look at things differently. It just doesn’t fit too well. I think it may have drawn them in once they got there, but they certainly waltzed away on their own volition.
I absolutely love Karen and Matt together. I don’t want it to end. Ever. :)
I only at flesh and stone but I have an idea what if AMY is the Doctor and Rivers kid . Then the end of Flesh and stone would be really mess up LOL.
I hope this isnt the end of Amy’s crack .