Why didn't Doctor save Amy and Rory from the weeping angel?

DudeistBelieve

TellEmSteveDave.com
Sep 9, 2010
4,771
1
0
BabySinclair said:
Dr Who time travel rules in a nutshell


The big thing in the Moffet era is that you can't know your own future. That same episode he hears that River breaks her arm trying to get free because that's what the account River wrote said she did. It's about creating a loop. Martha and the doctor had a playbook because that's what was written because that's what they said and did, so that's what was written, and so forth. Rory saw his death and dying in another way created a paradox. Then he saw his gravestone, preventing that death (by him getting killed again on another adventure or in another way that doesn't generate that grave) would stack a paradox on a paradox. That's probably not a good thing.
So basically time can be re-written until time is known by the time traveller?
 

Neyon

New member
May 3, 2009
124
0
0
TheRightToArmBears said:
My fairly basic understanding is this- Random things in the Whoniverse (I'm not sure if that's a term, if it's not, you heard it here first) are fixed points, like Pompeii, and can't be interfered with.
This is basically it. It is the go-to explanation whenever the writers can't think up a logical reason as to why their plot happens.
 

Ian Booton

New member
Apr 29, 2010
14
0
0
Because Amy and Rory DID stay in the 1930s. Brian Williams, Rory's dad, receives a letter from them and meets their son, Anthony Williams. Because of this, because they DID send this letter and because Anthony WAS there and because Brian DID receive the letter from him, Rory and Amy were stuck in the past. The reason the Doctor couldn't go back and save them? Because it HAPPENED, and that's that. It's pretty clear from the lore that the Doctor can't change things that for-sure, without a doubt, happened. That's actually the entire theme of the specials between series 4 and series 5, so yeah. For reference, see how Bioshock Infinite handles fixed points in time, Doctor Who seems to operate similarly.

My proof? This video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWU6XL9xI4k

So, to all of you claiming that this proves that Moffat is a bad writer and doesn't know what he's doing, would you kindly stop? I recognize that this is an obscure bit of canon that I'm pulling out, but if you know Doctor Who well enough to complain about this "problem" then you should probably know the surrounding lore.

tl;dr version, Stop complaining, there is an in-canon explanation.
 

Pebkio

The Purple Mage
Nov 9, 2009
780
0
0
Ian Booton said:
Because Amy and Rory DID stay in the 1930s. Brian Williams, Rory's dad, receives a letter from them and meets their son, Anthony Williams. Because of this, because they DID send this letter and because Anthony WAS there and because Brian DID receive the letter from him, Rory and Amy were stuck in the past. The reason the Doctor couldn't go back and save them? Because it HAPPENED, and that's that. It's pretty clear from the lore that the Doctor can't change things that for-sure, without a doubt, happened. That's actually the entire theme of the specials between series 4 and series 5, so yeah. For reference, see how Bioshock Infinite handles fixed points in time, Doctor Who seems to operate similarly.

My proof? This video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWU6XL9xI4k

So, to all of you claiming that this proves that Moffat is a bad writer and doesn't know what he's doing, would you kindly stop? I recognize that this is an obscure bit of canon that I'm pulling out, but if you know Doctor Who well enough to complain about this "problem" then you should probably know the surrounding lore.

tl;dr version, Stop complaining, there is an in-canon explanation.
You, of course, I hope, realize that this A: wasn't actually filmed and not seen, even in the boxset and B: Could just be considered a pandering feels piece meant to put more closure into the Amy and Rory storyline. Neither Amy, Rory or the Doctor knew about this letter or Anthony when they went to New York, so it doesn't fit in with the "reading some writing causes personal timeline events" thing. It doesn't count as setup and can't even be counted as canon as it was never included.

Also: This was a project of Chris Chibnall, not Steven "The Hack Writer" Moffat.
 

Canadamus Prime

Robot in Disguise
Jun 17, 2009
14,334
0
0
My understanding of it is because the temporal coordinates they were sent to were incredibly unstable due to the presence of so many weeping angels and the paradox so the TARDIS couldn't land there. What got me is why the Doctor couldn't have just landed the TARDIS a year after the Ponds were sent to and pick them up.
 

-Ezio-

Eats Nuts, Kicks Butts.
Nov 17, 2009
348
0
0
wasnt that episode where all of time happened all at once because river somehow broke a fixed point in time?

that's why.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
SaneAmongInsane said:
Was just watching a Youtube spoof where Batman calls the Doctor out on it and it really got me thinking.
I love HISHE.

Why is it all of a sudden a fixed point?
Since the beginning of the new series, it's been established that the Doctor can't change time once the TARDIS lands and they become part of events. This is sometimes played fast and loose with (Smith and Jones, Blink both come to mind), but it is a rule.

However, there have been numerous arguments for why they could circumvent this. The answer was best summed up by a JPEG of Matt Smith saying "because shut up, that's why!"

Not aimed at you, mind. But that's the answer. This is a reverse asspull. Instead of them having the Doctor (or occasionally, Rose) save the day by pulling something out of their ass, the writers pulled a reason that this was goodbye forever for Rory and Amy, even as Rose was slated to make her thirtieth impossible return.

Not to mention, The Doctor has cheated a "fixed point" before. That was the whole point of series six.

TheRightToArmBears said:
That said, it's all pretty contradictory. I remember a Christopher Eccleston era episode where Rose saves her dad from being run over, changing time and causing giant-time-judge-bat-bastards to rock up and start causing a ruckus. The episode also says that you're not supposed to come into contact with another version of yourself. The bat things are never heard from again and the 'don't touch yourself (giggity)' rule is forgotten about.
Rose couldn't touch baby Rose because the timeline was already compromised. I don't think a similar scenario has arisen since, has it? Other than Rose being selfish and stupid, which seems to be every episode up to the end of Season 2.

Reed Spacer said:
Because the Doctor is secretly a complete jerk.
I think it's more that he's secretly a dumbass. He's like Jack Sparrow, lucky as hell that things work out.

Except a couple of The Doctors were open jerks. The first Doctor was a bit of a dick. Okay, a whole lot of dicks.

Neyon said:
This is basically it. It is the go-to explanation whenever the writers can't think up a logical reason as to why their plot happens.
Actually, it's a quite good explanation for why things work in the Who Universe. It makes a lot more sense than their previous reason, "shut up, that's why!"
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
-Ezio- said:
wasnt that episode where all of time happened all at once because river somehow broke a fixed point in time?

that's why.
Which is stupid, as The doctor goes on to break the same one. Oh, then there was the last one, where the only penalty was Tennant wangsting over a slight change in a Wikipedia page.
 

Pebkio

The Purple Mage
Nov 9, 2009
780
0
0
-Ezio- said:
wasnt that episode where all of time happened all at once because river somehow broke a fixed point in time?

that's why.
No, that was another episode. That happened before this season. Y'know... the episode that ended the season in which the Doctor left Amy and Rory at a cool new home with a cool new car so that they could avoid being led to their deaths by his actions. Season Six.

This thread is about the fifth episode in season seven. The one where Amy and Rory were lead to their deaths by the Doctor's actions.
 

ThreeWords

New member
Feb 27, 2009
5,179
0
0
albino boo said:
Dr Who, in its 50 years, has always been a show of minimal internal consistency. What the Tardis/Dr can do has always changed to suit the dramatic purpose of the writers. The show is intended as 40 minute early Saturday evening romp that is watched by a family together. Its aimed at a totally different demographic from the US sci fi shows, with all the rules and lore that comes with them. Basically, the only explanation you are ever going to is Amy and Rory became a fixed point in time. This part of the reason why the show has lasted so long, is because the abilities and even the character of the lead can change, which always leads to new dramatic possibilities.
This is an important point. Doctor Who is a show that runs primarily on the fact that one huge silly in-joke; a fact which seems not to translate very well across the pond. They don't so much care about creating a huge internally consistent lore: Doctor Who physics is simply "lol plot" and that's the joke.

Personally, I find it easier to view each episode as an independent story, just like how not every Batman comic has him use the exact same gear, skills, rules or even physics
 

Vivi22

New member
Aug 22, 2010
2,300
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
-Ezio- said:
wasnt that episode where all of time happened all at once because river somehow broke a fixed point in time?

that's why.
Which is stupid, as The doctor goes on to break the same one.
Except he didn't. What was supposed to happen happened, they just didn't know it was the shapeshifting time ship filled with tiny people and not the Doctor that was shot.
 

Pebkio

The Purple Mage
Nov 9, 2009
780
0
0
Vivi22 said:
Zachary Amaranth said:
-Ezio- said:
wasnt that episode where all of time happened all at once because river somehow broke a fixed point in time?

that's why.
Which is stupid, as The doctor goes on to break the same one.
Except he didn't. What was supposed to happen happened, they just didn't know it was the shapeshifting time ship filled with tiny people and not the Doctor that was shot.
Yeah, that always bugged me... so a group of soldiers who have the technology and knowhow to create a "fixed point in time" from nothing made the blundering mistake of creating the fixed point in time where a robot that looks like their target is shot. In fact, how does one "create" a fixed point in time? Does it involve not checking all the variables? Because they totally didn't check all the variables. They also had the technology to make a spacesuit that can move on it's own and force the person wearing it to do stuff... wait, why was River Song needed to shoot the doctor? Why are people saying she killed him at all... it looks like a programable robot suit shot him...

Incidentally, they also knew how to make timelordy people out of babies who were conceived while travelling in the time vortex... and it was shown that there are many races capable of time travelling... so why weren't there just a bunch of races genetically manipulating themselves to be timelords? Why did they need the child of Amy and Rory when I'm sure they could find any 1% of their own population to do the job.

Wait, the Clerics were the people who kidnapped a baby with the full intention of conditioning her to kill one man and then imprisoned her for killing that man? Shouldn't she have gotten a medal and a key to the city?

---

Huh... this all might seem off topic, but I can excuse it away by saying that these are just a bunch of examples that explains why TATM made no sense.
 

-Ezio-

Eats Nuts, Kicks Butts.
Nov 17, 2009
348
0
0
Pebkio said:
Vivi22 said:
Zachary Amaranth said:
-Ezio- said:
wasnt that episode where all of time happened all at once because river somehow broke a fixed point in time?

that's why.
Which is stupid, as The doctor goes on to break the same one.
Except he didn't. What was supposed to happen happened, they just didn't know it was the shapeshifting time ship filled with tiny people and not the Doctor that was shot.
Yeah, that always bugged me... so a group of soldiers who have the technology and knowhow to create a "fixed point in time" from nothing made the blundering mistake of creating the fixed point in time where a robot that looks like their target is shot. In fact, how does one "create" a fixed point in time? Does it involve not checking all the variables? Because they totally didn't check all the variables. They also had the technology to make a spacesuit that can move on it's own and force the person wearing it to do stuff... wait, why was River Song needed to shoot the doctor? Why are people saying she killed him at all... it looks like a programable robot suit shot him...

Incidentally, they also knew how to make timelordy people out of babies who were conceived while travelling in the time vortex... and it was shown that there are many races capable of time travelling... so why weren't there just a bunch of races genetically manipulating themselves to be timelords? Why did they need the child of Amy and Rory when I'm sure they could find any 1% of their own population to do the job.

Wait, the Clerics were the people who kidnapped a baby with the full intention of conditioning her to kill one man and then imprisoned her for killing that man? Shouldn't she have gotten a medal and a key to the city?

---

Huh... this all might seem off topic, but I can excuse it away by saying that these are just a bunch of examples that explains why TATM made no sense.
i imagine it became a fixed point because of wibbly wobblyness of there technically being 3 versions of river present in the same place at the same time(space suit river, regular river and fetus river.)
 

Pebkio

The Purple Mage
Nov 9, 2009
780
0
0
-Ezio- said:
Pebkio said:
Vivi22 said:
Zachary Amaranth said:
-Ezio- said:
wasnt that episode where all of time happened all at once because river somehow broke a fixed point in time?

that's why.
Which is stupid, as The doctor goes on to break the same one.
Except he didn't. What was supposed to happen happened, they just didn't know it was the shapeshifting time ship filled with tiny people and not the Doctor that was shot.
Yeah, that always bugged me... so a group of soldiers who have the technology and knowhow to create a "fixed point in time" from nothing made the blundering mistake of creating the fixed point in time where a robot that looks like their target is shot. In fact, how does one "create" a fixed point in time? Does it involve not checking all the variables? Because they totally didn't check all the variables. They also had the technology to make a spacesuit that can move on it's own and force the person wearing it to do stuff... wait, why was River Song needed to shoot the doctor? Why are people saying she killed him at all... it looks like a programable robot suit shot him...

Incidentally, they also knew how to make timelordy people out of babies who were conceived while travelling in the time vortex... and it was shown that there are many races capable of time travelling... so why weren't there just a bunch of races genetically manipulating themselves to be timelords? Why did they need the child of Amy and Rory when I'm sure they could find any 1% of their own population to do the job.

Wait, the Clerics were the people who kidnapped a baby with the full intention of conditioning her to kill one man and then imprisoned her for killing that man? Shouldn't she have gotten a medal and a key to the city?

---

Huh... this all might seem off topic, but I can excuse it away by saying that these are just a bunch of examples that explains why TATM made no sense.
i imagine it became a fixed point because of wibbly wobblyness of there technically being 3 versions of river present in the same place at the same time(space suit river, regular river and fetus river.)
Okay, that's the mechanics of how they could've cemented it and it fits in with the Doctor mistaking his own personal timeline for fixed points in time (because he's been with himself many times). No problem there, but how, then, could some humans from the year 5000 control what happened in that fixed point in time? That was the gist of my question, how did they have control over time BEFORE the event occured? I say "before" because they act like Lake Silencio was their plan all along when they grabbed up River from the university.

The three Rivers thing answers one question (why did they have to use Amy's child) but it brings up more and complicates some old ones.

And let's not forget that the whole thing was to prevent what happened at the end of season seven even though they know it's going to happen anyway. Additionally, how did they know about the problem but not the solution even through the solution was already spread across the timelines?

They don't sound too compitent in that light and I'm left wondering how they pulled any of this off.

Alternatively, if they DID know the outcome was going to be whatever was going to happen anyway and that they were going to fail... then they were just wasting time creating one of the most pretentious Doctor Who companions I've seen since The Key to Time.

...I don't know about you, but I don't like either of those conclusions...
 

Ian Booton

New member
Apr 29, 2010
14
0
0
Pebkio said:
Ian Booton said:
Because Amy and Rory DID stay in the 1930s. Brian Williams, Rory's dad, receives a letter from them and meets their son, Anthony Williams. Because of this, because they DID send this letter and because Anthony WAS there and because Brian DID receive the letter from him, Rory and Amy were stuck in the past. The reason the Doctor couldn't go back and save them? Because it HAPPENED, and that's that. It's pretty clear from the lore that the Doctor can't change things that for-sure, without a doubt, happened. That's actually the entire theme of the specials between series 4 and series 5, so yeah. For reference, see how Bioshock Infinite handles fixed points in time, Doctor Who seems to operate similarly.

My proof? This video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWU6XL9xI4k

So, to all of you claiming that this proves that Moffat is a bad writer and doesn't know what he's doing, would you kindly stop? I recognize that this is an obscure bit of canon that I'm pulling out, but if you know Doctor Who well enough to complain about this "problem" then you should probably know the surrounding lore.

tl;dr version, Stop complaining, there is an in-canon explanation.
You, of course, I hope, realize that this A: wasn't actually filmed and not seen, even in the boxset and B: Could just be considered a pandering feels piece meant to put more closure into the Amy and Rory storyline. Neither Amy, Rory or the Doctor knew about this letter or Anthony when they went to New York, so it doesn't fit in with the "reading some writing causes personal timeline events" thing. It doesn't count as setup and can't even be counted as canon as it was never included.

Also: This was a project of Chris Chibnall, not Steven "The Hack Writer" Moffat.
What can and cannot be considered canon is a bit trickier than just saying that something that wasn't included isn't canon. For example: in Star Wars, is it canon that the Empire was nationalizing industries? That's only in the deleted scenes, yet I still consider it canon. It was filmed, yes, but never completed. I consider the video clip to be canon, but whether or not you do is up to you. I accept it as canon purely because it solves this issue.

That still doesn't invalidate my point about fixed timelines of course. The Doctor can tell when an event HAS to happen, right? Perhaps them getting stuck in New York was MEANT to happen. Perhaps whatever/whoever is writing the rules for what is and is not a fixed point decided that this would be, and that the Doctor interfering would only make things worse, a lesson he has learned before.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
15,479
1,159
118
Because Moffat's stuff makes no sense?

Nobody can harm the Weeping Angels...except for some 30's mob boss, who's worked out how, but they don't bother to ask him.

The Statue of Liberty runs around with nobody noticing.

Also, everything else in that story.