The Gallifreyan Embassy
Home of the Doctor Who podcast DOCTOR WHO: PODSHOCK
Advertising | Donate | Feedback | New Website | Podshock | Shop | Forum | Media Gallery | Web Resources | Polls
 Gallifreyan Embassy 3.0  
  • Doctor Who: Podshock 305 - Interviews with Peter Howell and Ron Katz
  • Five Years of The Cultdom Collective Podcast!
  • The Official BBC Teaser Promo Video for the New 2014 Series [VIDEO]
  • How do you rate Doctor Who: The Claws of Axos? (5=Fantastic)
  • Doctor Who: Podshock 304 - 'The Claws of Axos' is Reviewed
  • New Doctor Who Series Launch Confirmed for August and Teaser Promo Video
  • How do you rate Doctor Who: The Invasion of Time? (5=Fantastic)
  • Doctor Who: Podshock 303 - 'The Invasion of Time' is Reviewed
  • Dozens of Doctor Who guests converge on Long Island this November!
  • Doctor Who: Podshock 302 - Terry Walsh Interviewed

  •  Topics  
    Home
    Doctor Who News (188/0)
    DW: Podshock (201/0)
    DW Reviews (33/0)
    Torchwood (15/0)
    Sarah Jane Adven... (13/0)
    General News (29/0)
    Embassy News (19/0)
    Editorials (5/0)
    Alien Tech (2/0)

     Extra! Extra!  

    Become a Podshock Supporting Subscriber


     Randomizer  
    Group Photo at Gallifrey 2006
    Group Photo at Gallifrey 2006
    Browse Album

     User Functions  
    :

    :


    Lost your password?

     Support Podshock  

    This site and our podcast are free to use and listen to respectively. Though there are costs involved in maintaining and producing both. If you like, please make a donation to help offset these costs and to help ensure that we can continue to bring you both. Thank you so much.

    You can make a one time donation of any amount you like using the above "Donate" button. If you rather make an annual recurring donation of $25 (that is less than 50 cents a week), use the "Subscribe" button below.

    Save big on toys & collectibles at Entertainment Earth! CLICK HERE for Doctor Who, Star Wars, Buffy, Ozzy, Spider-Man, & more!


     Events  
    There are no upcoming events

     Audible UK  

    Dr Who Audio Downloads from audible.co.uk


     DWNY  
    DWNY

     Ads by Google  

     Older Stories  
    Wednesday 06-May
  • In Russell/Moffat We Trust Shirts and More (1)

  • Tuesday 05-May
  • Join Us for Our Second Second Life Meet Up (3)

  • Friday 01-May
  • Doctor Who: Podshock - Episode 147 (0)

  • Wednesday 29-Apr
  • Sonic Newsdriver for the Week of the 27th of April 2009 (0)

  • Saturday 25-Apr
  • Who Party 14 Toronto Doctor Who Convention (0)
  • Doctor Who: Podshock - Episode 146 (1)

  • Thursday 23-Apr
  • Sonic Newsdriver and Hoo on Who for the Week of the 20 April 2009 (0)
  • Doctor Who: Podshock - Episode 145 (4)

  • Wednesday 15-Apr
  • Three New Producers Announced (0)

  • Saturday 11-Apr
  • Planet Of The Dead Canadian air date confirmed (0)

  • Tuesday 07-Apr
  • Doctor Who: Podshock Recognized as Best Podcast (1)
  • Sonic Newsdriver for the Week of the 5th of April 2009 (0)

  • Wednesday 01-Apr
  • Doctor Who: Podshock - Episode 144 (5)

  • Friday 20-Mar
  • Doctor Who: Podshock - Episode 143 (3)
  • Hitchhiker's Guide to British Sci-Fi - Episode 3 (1)

  •  Notice  

    Doctor Who and the TARDIS are owned and trademarked by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). The Gallifreyan Embassy and the Doctor Who: Podshock podcast are not connected to the BBC in any way. No infringement is intended.



     

     
     Home »  The David Tennant Era »  S3-Ep 10 'Blink'
    Prev Topic Next Next Topic Printable Version
    S3-Ep 10 'Blink' Views: 8918
     Tuesday, June 12 2007 @ 07:13 AM EDT
    [Quote  by:  daveac] Here's my new Blink! wallpaper (1024x768)



    Cheers, daveac


    This is a much better way of including larger dimensioned images:-

    'width=600'

    Now 'The Gallifreyean Embassy Forum' is
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Wait for it!
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Bigger on the inside Big Grin

    Cheers, daveac

    daveac on blip.tv, TalkShoe, iTunes, LiveVideo, uStream, GE, Sci-Fi, DWO, DS & WTA, Dave C on WLP, cooperda on AVF, dac100 on YouTube & PB, dac on Tiscali
      Profile    PM    Email    Website 
     Quote 
     
     Tuesday, June 12 2007 @ 07:14 AM EDT
    [Quote  by:  whodovoodoo] A further allusion (another easter egg) to the Doctor's family/wife/son or previous existence thereof? I don't think this comment relates to Family of Blood as John Smith was never married. Any thoughts?
    Yeah. I've got a thought. Another nail in the coffin of Lungbarrow, mate. And certain parts of "Human Nature" included, any chance to see the back of the Cartmel-bloody-master-plan and the New Adventures line is a good thing.

    The Doctor has a family, falls in love, and oh yes, has sex. Deal with it. It's all well and good for him to be alien and enigmatic, but take him too far away from the audience and he's just bloody Gandalf. Third Moffatt story in a row to suggest the Doctor has a romantic side, third 5-star experience. Coincidence? You decide. Hundreds of Doctor Who books and Moffatt hits it out of the park with first-person diary entry written in the voice of a 12-year-old girl for a bleedin' annual.

    I mean seriously, examine the sheer economy.
    I am top in English, and Miss Telfer says I have an excellent vocabulary. I have sixteen friends who are mainly girls. I haven't taken much interest in boys yet, because of the noise.
    That's freakin' brilliant. The precision of her number of friends and those four little words—because of the noise—give you more about the character of Sally Sparrow than it would take other writers whole pages to define.

    One of the coolest things about this adaptation is actually that the character of Sally Sparrow hasn't changed that much. You can quite easily imagine that the Sally of "Blink" is the older version of the Sally in the short story.


    "I think of myself as ambitious in casting terms, and I know that Bonnie [Langford] has the potential to make the part totally unirritating . . ." — JNT, 1986
      Profile    PM    Email    Website 
     Quote 
     
     Tuesday, June 12 2007 @ 08:25 AM EDT
    [Quote  by:  daveac]
    [Quote  by:  Magpie] It's so much scarier to have fangy rock angels appear closer and closer! If they could just throw (or shoot) things they might as well be any kind of monster. I was properly terrified, bravo!


    Another theory - is that the Doctor throws the stone!

    ie. having read Sally's report

    Cheers, daveac


    this is what I had assumed - it never occurred to me to question this until I started reading this thread! That is why I loved this episode; I never even thought to question the holes.

    That is until the four angels at the end. Sparrow and Nightengale were not looking at them as the Tardis dematerialized (shielding their eyes, holding onto each other for dear life), and the Tardis disappears slowly, so why wasn't there enough time for the angels to hide their eyes from each other? but, I won't dwell on that at all.

    I watched this episode on my Sunday flight to NYC. The poor man sitting next to me was twice woken up by my YELPs and EPPs! (Strangely enough, the man across the aisle from me asked me to turn the screen a bit, as he had Tivo'd the episode back in Hull -- yes, funny since it was mentioned in the episode -- and didn't want to be spoiled when he got back to the UK! Interesting to me that he wasn't at all curious as to how I had acquired the episode. . . . but perhaps he "knows" of these things?) I was truly frightened every time an angel showed up on the show, starting with the one moving ever so closely to Sally and Miss Nightingale in the beginning.

    Loved it. That really is all I can say. But I have a few other thoughts to add: I think this is the first time this season that by Tuesday morning the thread for the episode has reached 6+ pages. Most other episodes have not garnered that much comment that soon. I think that definitely speaks to how we all reacted to this episode!

    Also, I cannot BELIEVE there are only three episodes left! It feels like the season has just started!!! (I guess that's what happens when you have only liked 1/2 of the episodes). Jack's back... As worried as Darth seems to be about that (and by the way, Boom Town was one of my favorite episodes of Nine's as well), I'm taking a cue from Whodovoodoo and keeping my expectations low.

    Also, BEST CONFIDENTIAL EVER! Loved the on going discussions, but I also loved the almost 5 minutes of montage at the end with the old doctors, the monsters, the companions... brilliant!

    supremacy is relative
      Profile    PM    Email   
     Quote 
     
     Tuesday, June 12 2007 @ 08:49 AM EDT

    Just watching Tennis - the Stella Artois grass court tennis at Queen's in the UK.

    And we've just had a 'blink' moment - as Andy Roddick had served at 149 MPH and viewers were told that you had 'less than half-a-second' to hit the return
    (EDIT if fact I think they said 'comes at you in less than half a second' - fits ever better!!)
    - followed by the comment:-

    'well you better not blink then' Laughing Out Loud

    Cheers, daveac

    daveac on blip.tv, TalkShoe, iTunes, LiveVideo, uStream, GE, Sci-Fi, DWO, DS & WTA, Dave C on WLP, cooperda on AVF, dac100 on YouTube & PB, dac on Tiscali
      Profile    PM    Email    Website 
     Quote 
     
     Tuesday, June 12 2007 @ 11:10 AM EDT
    OK- I absolutely loved it. I am already a big fan of Moffett Moffat, and this episode had some similarities to a few episodes of Coupling that I can remember...

    As a physicist, I really enjoyed the explanation of the behavior of the weeping angels as a result of "quantum mechanics" effects (I forget the actual term used by the Doctor). In quantum mechanics there is an idea that things (sub-atomic particles, light, etc) do not have a particular existence (speed, position, momentum, etc) until the are observed. Look up the idea of "Schroedinger's Cat" if you don't know what I am talking about. Anyhow, that really clinched in my favor for this episode.

    On top of that, it was a real time-travel episode, and I simply was thrilled with the chronologically displaced conversation via DVD and transcript. What an intelligent bit of writing that was (that's the part that reminded me of Coupling).

    Oh- also, did anyone else catch Billy's statement, "Her name was Sally, too?" Am I the only one who made a connection to Cathy's statement, "I named her Sally. After you, of course." Haven't done the math, but could Billy's Sally have been Cathy's Sally, too? I guess I would also have to examine the photographs in some screen captures (Dave???). Probably also too much of a longshot, but it just occurred to me.

    Did you say "74,384,338 to 1 against"? That's my lucky number!
      Profile    PM    Email   
     Quote 
     
     Tuesday, June 12 2007 @ 11:19 AM EDT
    [Quote  by:  rocko] Oh- also, did anyone else catch Billy's statement, "Her name was Sally, too?" Am I the only one who made a connection to Cathy's statement, "I named her Sally. After you, of course." Haven't done the math, but could Billy's Sally have been Cathy's Sally, too? I guess I would also have to examine the photographs in some screen captures (Dave???). Probably also too much of a longshot, but it just occurred to me.


    NICE! I hadn't put that together, but I do love the connection!

    supremacy is relative
      Profile    PM    Email   
     Quote 
     
     Tuesday, June 12 2007 @ 12:09 PM EDT
    [Quote  by:  rocko] I guess I would also have to examine the photographs in some screen captures (Dave???). Probably also too much of a longshot, but it just occurred to me.


    Well here are three images but I don't think they help.

    There's Billie and 'his' Sally at the wedding, there's 'young sally' the grand-daughter and there the other couple who will be the young Sally's parents.

    Cheers, daveac







    daveac on blip.tv, TalkShoe, iTunes, LiveVideo, uStream, GE, Sci-Fi, DWO, DS & WTA, Dave C on WLP, cooperda on AVF, dac100 on YouTube & PB, dac on Tiscali
      Profile    PM    Email    Website 
     Quote 
     
     Tuesday, June 12 2007 @ 12:41 PM EDT
    [Quote  by:  daveac]
    This is a much better way of including larger dimensioned images:-

    'width=600'

    Now 'The Gallifreyean Embassy Forum' is
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Wait for it!
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Bigger on the inside Big Grin

    Cheers, daveac


    Haha... Yep, it is. I went into your postings and added the 600 pixel width limitation in order to keep the layout from getting too wacky here in the forums.

    Cheers,
    Louis

    ☛ Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LouisTrapani ♥ ♥
      Profile    PM    Email    Website 
     Quote 
     
     Tuesday, June 12 2007 @ 01:33 PM EDT
    [Quote  by:  DarthSkeptical]
    [Quote  by:  whodovoodoo] A further allusion (another easter egg) to the Doctor's family/wife/son or previous existence thereof? I don't think this comment relates to Family of Blood as John Smith was never married. Any thoughts?
    Yeah. I've got a thought. Another nail in the coffin of Lungbarrow, mate. And certain parts of "Human Nature" included, any chance to see the back of the Cartmel-bloody-master-plan and the New Adventures line is a good thing.

    The Doctor has a family, falls in love, and oh yes, has sex. Deal with it. It's all well and good for him to be alien and enigmatic, but take him too far away from the audience and he's just bloody Gandalf. Third Moffatt story in a row to suggest the Doctor has a romantic side, third 5-star experience. Coincidence? You decide.


    I think I love you man!
    What a response.

    I'm seriously happy that Who has a romantic side since he came back and never surprised that Moffat brings it into the picture big time. (The Girl in the Fireplace remains my favourite of his episodes so far, I'm much too soppy on the inside for my own good).

    I'm just fascinated by who the Doc would marry and whether we'll ever get any further info on the back story.
    "I had a son once"
    "I'm useless at weddings, especially my own"....

    So thats a whole heap of backstory to back fill in the Doc8 - Doc9 gap. I'm just wondering when we get the goods.

    *********************************************************** "Rubber Soles - Swear by them!"
      Profile    PM    Email    Website 
     Quote 
     
     Tuesday, June 12 2007 @ 02:32 PM EDT
    [Quote  by:  whodovoodoo]
    "I had a son once"
    "I'm useless at weddings, especially my own"....


    It's taken me some time to warm up to it, but I'd like to see his past relationships explored in more detail..

    BTW- I think it was "I had a brother once..." (in Simth and Jones).

    I can't recall the context, but in series 2 he said to Rose, "I was a dad" (or "I've been a dad"). These two comments, together with the line about his wedding, gives the air of ground work in order to establish his past family life. Could this be leading up to something??

    Anybody got any speculations about what's to come in the next 3 episodes? (I'm still catching up with the "live" podcasts, so just point me there if this has been discussed in depth already.)

    Did you say "74,384,338 to 1 against"? That's my lucky number!
      Profile    PM    Email   
     Quote 
     
     Tuesday, June 12 2007 @ 02:40 PM EDT
    [Quote  by:  mad4plaid]
    [Quote  by:  rocko] Oh- also, did anyone else catch Billy's statement, "Her name was Sally, too?" Am I the only one who made a connection to Cathy's statement, "I named her Sally. After you, of course." Haven't done the math, but could Billy's Sally have been Cathy's Sally, too? I guess I would also have to examine the photographs in some screen captures (Dave???). Probably also too much of a longshot, but it just occurred to me.


    NICE! I hadn't put that together, but I do love the connection!


    Yes, I thought about it and thought it would be a nice tie in between all the travelers involved. Makes you wonder if Kathy & Billy ever knew just how tied up in events they really were. Kathy was sent to 1920 give a few years till marriage and child production. The oldest child looks perhaps 11 or 12 and yound Sally loks perhaps 4 or 5. Guessing that Young Sally looks about 30 in the weding picture I think that it can be worked in without much difficulty. It works for me, I'll put it that way.

    Cheers,
    Mike M.

    I'm a Time Traveler, I point and laugh at archaeologist.
      Profile    PM    Email    Website 
     Quote 
     
     Tuesday, June 12 2007 @ 03:12 PM EDT
    [Quote  by:  merlin_mccarley]
    Yes, I thought about it and thought it would be a nice tie in between all the travelers involved. Makes you wonder if Kathy & Billy ever knew just how tied up in events they really were. Kathy was sent to 1920 give a few years till marriage and child production. The oldest child looks perhaps 11 or 12 and yound Sally loks perhaps 4 or 5. Guessing that Young Sally looks about 30 in the weding picture I think that it can be worked in without much difficulty. It works for me, I'll put it that way.

    Cheers,
    Mike M.


    It makes a nice completion to the story.

    And with my silly hat on:-

    What about Aunt Sally?
    ie. Worzel Gumage
    aka Jon Pertwee
    aka the Third Doctor

    Big Grin Big Grin Big Grin Big Grin

    Cheers, daveac

    daveac on blip.tv, TalkShoe, iTunes, LiveVideo, uStream, GE, Sci-Fi, DWO, DS & WTA, Dave C on WLP, cooperda on AVF, dac100 on YouTube & PB, dac on Tiscali
      Profile    PM    Email    Website 
     Quote 
     
     Tuesday, June 12 2007 @ 04:32 PM EDT
    [Quote  by:  rocko]As a physicist, I really enjoyed the explanation of the behavior of the weeping angels as a result of "quantum mechanics" effects (I forget the actual term used by the Doctor). In quantum mechanics there is an idea that things (sub-atomic particles, light, etc) do not have a particular existence (speed, position, momentum, etc) until the are observed. Look up the idea of "Schroedinger's Cat" if you don't know what I am talking about. Anyhow, that really clinched in my favor for this episode.

    On top of that, it was a real time-travel episode, and I simply was thrilled with the chronologically displaced conversation via DVD and transcript. What an intelligent bit of writing that was (that's the part that reminded me of Coupling).


    Yes the "Quantum Locked" Angels were a verry good Physics monster, the moment that they are not being observed they "Kill You Nicely". Yes it was wonderful to actually have a "Thinking Mans Who" for a change.

    Cheers,
    Mike M.

    I'm a Time Traveler, I point and laugh at archaeologist.
      Profile    PM    Email    Website 
     Quote 
     
     Tuesday, June 12 2007 @ 09:26 PM EDT
    [Quote  by:  merlin_mccarley]Yes the "Quantum Locked" Angels were a verry good Physics monster, the moment that they are not being observed they "Kill You Nicely". Yes it was wonderful to actually have a "Thinking Mans Who" for a change.

    Cheers,
    Mike M.


    But they were Quantum Locked when "any living thing" sees them. Cats? Rats? Dogs? Anything? Or is it just things that could possibly kill them? And if that's the case, why each other? Turning to stone, the Doctor said, prevents them from dying. But not from being bashed with hammers into little piles of rock.

    Really, it was fun, but makes absolutely no evolutionary sense whatever.

    Sean.

    One solid hope is worth a cartload of uncertainties.
      Profile    PM    Email    Website 
     Quote 
     
     Tuesday, June 12 2007 @ 11:46 PM EDT
    [Quote  by:  seanhuxter]
    But they were Quantum Locked when "any living thing" sees them. Cats? Rats? Dogs? Anything?


    That's funny, because that's just the question philosophers ask about quantum mechanics measurements. Some say that sentience must be involved, or else no measurements are possible. Others have a more "generic" view of what constitutes a measurement.

    Did you say "74,384,338 to 1 against"? That's my lucky number!
      Profile    PM    Email   
     Quote 
     

     
    Topic Legend:
    Normal Topic Normal Topic
    Locked Topic Locked Topic
    Sticky Topic Sticky Topic
    New Post New Post
    Sticky Topic W/ New Post Sticky Topic W/ New Post
    Locked Topic W/ New Post Locked Topic W/ New Post
    Subscribe to this topic Subscribe to this topic
    You may not post messages
    Full HTML is allowed
    Words are censored