I think I've finally grown up. I'm too old for Doctor who. While Matt smith is a definite contender for my second favourite incarnation (Tom Baker 4eva!) the new who feels more and more like it was written for cbeebies. I can watch classic who episodes again and again even the ones with Adric but not the New Series. I find it slightly offensive.
I like the Stone Angels.They are among the best creations of the series. This episode was .. poetically done; without being apocalyptic, so doubly appreciated (by me, that is! :) )
The Weeping Angels had been done to death and were stale for me as a Doctor Who baddy....but tonights episode gave them a new edge, that was as creepy, dangerous and evil as when they were first introducedRory in the cellar with the "babies" was so well written and executed that it combined with Rory's sacrifice on the roof top really book ended the character of RoryI will say, that whilst the ending came very close to having the same emotional impact that David Tenants final scenes had, it still felt rushed...especially in how Rory was just gone, and that was it..and the Doctor focused more on losing Amy then the fact that Rory was goneBut, to return to that little girl who waited in her garden whilst Grown up Amy read her "farewell" letter to her Raggedy Doctor was a beautiful way to end, asking the Doctor to never Travel alone was her way of saying its ok if he meets someone elseAll in all, the stand out episode of the series for obvious reasons, but the writing and reboot of the Angels was well dont. How you can find anything about modern Doctor Who offensive is bewildering..but each to their own5 Episodes not enough, and now the 3 month wait till Christmas :-(
I've watched Doctor Who since it's return in 2005 and very rarely have a bad word to say about any episode, this one was no exception. I cried and laughed, and laughed through tears. Together or not all definately the way of the Ponds throughout series 5, 6 and 7 and certainly a fitting way for them to go. Steven promised heartbreaking and he definately delivered. Yes there were a few plot holes but ultimately they were tiny compared to the whole point of the episode.
Personally I just watched it and let it finish. For some reason Who seems to have become less on storyline and more on a few episodes cramming things in. What happened to the good four part story every week?What I liked about it? they used the same rock that appears in the Adam Sandler film Little Nicky. The how and why points made some sense though.Bad points: Small cherub angels? Really? very much far fetchedMaybe it was me but I shed no tears even though it was supposed to be a tear jerker. The only thing that has me interested is the Christmas special. That is 3 months away though. So no rush there then.Could it have been better? Maybe. Better than others? Nope. Same level of writing and the idea to grip you as a fan of the series.
Emotionally, it hit the spot for me (yep, I ended up crying like a baby), and as a whole, I liked the episode a lot.On the 'negative' side, I think Amy's decision was a wee predictable, but once you know Rory would be gone, and this was it (meaning this was the last Ponds episode and the characters were not to come bak), it was the only way left. Great acting by all. I think they've all been brilliant this season.I will always want to have seen more of the Ponds, and there will always be questions left unanswered, but as an individual episode, I think 'The Angels take Manhattan' was great.And now, to wait. Again.
First impressions....a decent, dramatic finale for "the Ponds" despite the fact they'd left me cold for the last two and a half years. But Moffat's bag of tricks has run dangerously low now; the central conceit of the story - clues left in the past influencing future events - was just lifted wholesale from 'Blink'. Every Moffat episode these days just seemed like soemthing warmed-over from his previous, much better, episodes. He really needs - urgently - to just try to write an adventure story without wrapping it up in time travel paradoxes, two-bit witty dialogue and paper-thin characterisations. It's not been a good five weeks for Dr Who; I'm hoping that a new face aboard the TARDIS will bring in some much-needed fresh air to the show.
They saved the best for last (though why they are making this the last until Christmas is quite beyond me). I cried. Amy finally makes her definitive choice. Aged 87. Noted. Fixed time. Noted. Rules are always meant to be broken. Like wrists and regenerative energy. Loved it, but still felt there were possibilities left unfulfilled through time constraints (ironic, considering).
Thought it was beautiful. Beautifully crafted. Beautifully acted. Beautifully shot. A fitting end to one of the most successful (in my view) and wonderful doctor/companions relationships. Steven Moffat, you are the MAN!
I was completely unmoved. Didn't like the way Arthur played the parapet moment hardly looking at Amy. It went on too long, felt like padding. Liked the new take on the Angels - scuttling cherubs. River felt like a spare part in this episode and the plot just seemed to be contrived for one purpose - to ditch Amy & Rory. The only pang I felt was for Rory's Dad who would never see him again.
What happened to the Angel at the end?And why can't River/The Doctor just visit Amy & Rory after 1938? Presumably that was the only time that the Tardis can't visit...
I loved every moment of the whole episode. The angels were done perfectly, I loved the interaction between River and the Doctor, and the ending made me cry like a baby. Favorite episode ever.
Way too many logistical problems for me to like it. Why did Rory need to kill himself or escape to cause a paradox when he could have walked ten feet to his body and just touched it? How is the Statue of Liberty an angel? Someone is ALWAYS looking at it. Why are all these different statues now angels? If the image of an angel becomes an angel, then the entire world should be besieged by them, a giant feeding source like the one building in the episode. Why didn't they just use River's time agent device to travel in and out and fix all the problems in the episode? She seemed to be able to get into New York okay. And why did they decide Rory had to stay there? The Doctor contacted River while she was in New York, why couldn't he have done the same with Rory? He could have just sent him a note saying "hey, come to new jersey. We'll pick you up." Just because Rory's grave is in new york that doesn't mean he has to be. There are so many simple solutions to the problem. I also really dislike the way regenerations are treated in the new series. Now it's this magical energy that completely heals your body. Back in DT's last story, his body healed completely before it regenerated. If it healed first, why would it even need to regenerate?
did anyone notice for Rory it said "aged 82" but for Amy it said 'age 87"? as if he disappeared at 82?
Loved it a lot and sat through it twice now. Matt Smith rules and I wished River would stay with him a bit longer as I like her character. Sad goodbye to the Ponds but I do think it would have been more mind blowing if they never told us it was coming. I never had this hate for them that some so-called "fans" do.I've loved all of the Matt Smith era except for 5x02 and he's been my favorite Doctor next to Baker and Pertwee. I can't figure out how supposed Who fans rag on this current incarnation of the show. Reading comments on Aintitcool.com about these past 5 shows, the viewers are brutal with comments and just need to complain. I doubt any of them could actually do it better than Moff and RTD did if given a chance anyway.The Angels are still my favorite monsters and I don't get tired of them. I can see them getting overused like the Joker in Batman comics (or like the Daleks) and they need a break but people need to complain and just think they should have been used just that once in Blink. Whatever...Doctor Who is still the best hour of TV in America...
How did the angel Statue of Liberty move? I mean, there is always someone looking at it, but, still very good episode, I was in tears at the end when Rory got zapped into the past and Amy went with him. The thing that really freaked me out was the angels smile, with stone eyes, ahhhhhh!But why didn't River just jump back into the past and get back Rory and then they could leave?
For regeneration, When it came to DT, I assume once the process started, you can't stop. So who cares that it does fix you, you're getting a new body anyway. I don like how The docor was able to use it to heal River though. Maybe it would be ok in the first 15 hours of regeneration but this Doctor is 10+ years old. It shouldn't be possible.
A wonderful episode gorgeously mounted and also a significant redemption for the series last ill-advised dalek jaunt to manhattan. Not to mention gave us new and terrifying reason to be afraid of the weeping angels.As for the Ponds departure I wasn't as emotionally impacted by it owing heavily to the fact that it was inevitable when you take into consideration that ever since The Eleventh Hour Moffat has been cunningly foreshadowing The Pond's departure to this very moment. Her whole story (And Rory regretably is an extension to that story) is about growing up and then about life as a whole. It was a matter of time before >Spoilers< Death came into the picture. It would have been a sad ending if Amy was wrong and she never got to see Rory again. but seeing as it ended up that way you can't really say they lost anything. I think it would have been even more sad if The Doctor went to Rory's dad and Amy's parents and explained what happened and seeing their reactions. especially Rory's dad cause he was made of awesome. Nevertheless despite predictability it was still was satisfying closure for these two characters.
As fan of the history of DW novelizations I think it's amazing we got an episode that is partly about it's own novelization. Was River channeling Terry Dicks when she wrote her book?
@blakes17. "written for cbeebies"? - You're kidding right? Since when has a cbeebies show dealt with couples committing suicide and time paradoxes? You might want to fix your TV - it was clearly tuned to a different show. And how prey tell do you find it offensive? They kept their clothes on. Well, except the naked cherub WAs, but they're funny that way.
The new episodes always speak about events that are "time-locked" and can't be changed. We already know that's not true, because a writer will always find a way to go back to that particular time and change it if they want to bring that character back. I've never been disillusioned with any of the new DW episodes, but for some reason, I was disillusioned with this one. It was a given that if this was to be Amy and Rory's last time with the Doctor that the Weeping Angels would be the agents in removing them from the series. I just didn't like the cold way that River Song reacted to her parents' departure. (I also hate the way she constantly slaps the Doctor. Makes me wish she'd get a taste of her own medicine.) There were too many holes in this episode, and all statues being Weeping Angels? Pu-leese!!!! I wish the new episodes would stop being so messy in jumbling things together to then suddenly resolve them during the final minutes of the episodes. The best part of this episode was Amy's "farewell" to the Doctor on the final page of the book.
So what happened with the angels, or "lonely assassins," not being able to look at one another? Isn't that the whole reason they cover their faces with their hands? All of Manhattan was supposed to be jumping with giant Liberty angels and baby angels, broken angels, and vengeful angels and they all ran a hotel together. The angels do not come off as being too lonely anymore, but other than that and a few wibbly wobbly holes in the fabric of space and time that is "The Angels Take Manhattan," I enjoyed the episode. It was a fun send off for the fun couple. Fare thee well Amy and Rory Arthur Williams.
I thought it was rushed. The story never had a chance to fully develop. We are left asking what ever happened to the promise The Doctor made Rory's dad. Why can't The Doctor go back to say, 1942 and see them?? The paradox scenario just does not work here, and is never explained. These past 5 episodes were all without much depth. Too bad really.
Agree. Lost emotional impact as Ponds always in peril/killed then brought back to life. How many times Rory killed? Too many plot holes. Eg why can't Dr land in LA Philly etc and pick up Ponds or use vortex manipulator. Really below average series.
Disappointingly, I didn't enjoy this episode as much as I wanted to. The ending was absolutely beautiful and did make me cry a little, and I also liked the film noir style, which worked well with the Angels. However, I found there to be too many plot contrivances and things that didn't really make much sense - the Statue of Liberty stomping across New York City without anyone noticing, the coincidence behind the Doctor reading the book at exactly the right time, the lack of any satisfying explanation as to why he can't just go and visit them.Full review on my blog: http://thisisgood-isntit.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/beautiful-nonsense-in-new-york-angels.html
This episode, like others have said, is riddled with more holes than the Doctor's put in the space-time continuum from all his travels. There were just too many inconsistencies in this story to make it enjoyable to watch. Here's a run down on my thoughts:- The angels have become a tired & overused DW monster & the rules about what they can do & their behaviour change between episodes.- 'Regenerative energy' is a thing now? To heal a wrist? So why has the Doctor hardly used it in the past on those he's loved? And the Doctor can choose when to use it?- Amy & Rory were pretty one dimensional characters so it was hard to care that they left. I didn't believe that Amy cared that much for Rory, in spite of her tears. It was like the Rose/Mickey relationship, but if Rose had stayed with Mickey even though she didn't love him.- Suicide? When has that ever been an appropriate topic for DW and kids?- What happened to the angel at the end? Did the Doctor just leave it there in NY?- Why didn't River Song use her wrist watch time travel thing to go back even to a time just before or after 1938 to get them back?- What constitutes a 'fixed point' in time versus one the Doctor can mess with? Or do the writers just throw them in as a convenient plot device to quickly wrap up a loose end?Sorry guys. I've watched Doctor Who since 1987 and these episodes are all about the action and hype rather than quality story lines with convincing characters the audience care about.
I think Amy Pond is one of the best companions ever, so it was very sad to see her go.I found the method of her departure to be especially unbelievable, however. Her departure involved fixed points in time being impossible to change. But we JUST DEALT with fixed points in time last season, and the Doctor proved they could be beaten by using a robot double. The Doctor defeated fixed points at the end of last season. I do not understand why he cannot have two robot doubles built of Amy and Rory, discreetly replace the real ones, have the fake ones zapped by the Angel, and get around the problem. It doesn't create a paradox. What would actually be buried in those graves are the robot doubles, just like what was actually burned on Lake Silencio was the Doctor's robot double.I hate this ending because it completely erases what is an a very recent and established (just 6 episodes ago?) work around for fixed points in time.Its very difficult to grade the rest of the story because it requires one to forget the events of "The Wedding of River Song" and believe that fixed points are impossible to change once again, with the book and the hotel all representations of fixed points. I felt the overweight collector could have been fleshed out more, but as is typical of Moffat, we just get a glimpse of his personality and motivation.Overall, the story made so little sense given recent established history, that I found it incredibly annoying and grade it as the worst story of season 7 and its not close.
Addendum to my robot double post...The only saving grace to Angels Take Manhattan is that this IS a false finish. That Moffatt chose this ending specifically in order to be able to bring them back later, like for the 50th anniversary. Bring them back for the 50th using the robot double trick, then have them go home for good and live in the blue house in England.If that's the case, then it is a brilliant ending because it fooled just about everyone.
With regard to all the statues in Manhattan being Angels, that some are complaining about...I took this story as implying that this was effectively an "alternative universe Manhattan" they were dealing with. They didn't just erase the hotel from history when Amy and Rory jumped off the roof, they erase almost all the angels from Manhattan, save the survivor.In this sense, this story is like "Pyramids of Mars" where they slid off into an alternate timeline that needed correcting.
Whereas I thought the wrap-up was very poignant, I'm glad it got rid of my least favourite companion -Rory the whiniest companion of all.The Tesseract hypothosis for bringing back the Ponds would be a terrible idea.I like the fact that River Song is in my humble opinion tied for being teh best female companion with Sarah-Jane Smith.I think this was teh best episode of this series so far followed by The Gunfighter/Asylum of the Daleks/Dinosaurs on A Spaceship/The Power of 3I can't waint for @Neilhimself (s) next episode-next series!
Stepping outside of the series, I think we've been hearing that this was the Pond's last season for far too long... meaning it's a set up by the producers. Pragmatically, it costs MILLIONS of dollars (or pounds or Euros) to cast and write characters that audiences like. The studio would not risk that investment. And Dr. Who has crossed the Pond (pun intended). Dr Who is popular in America? That's due to the Ponds and it could mean MEGA money. We haven't seen the last of them...
Dylan, honestly, UK TV doesn't work like that - it really doesn't cost MILLIONS of pounds (in the UK) to create characters audiences like. It either happens or it doesn't. Didn't for me this time, sadly. Amy and Rory are gone, we'll not see hem back. Onwards and upwards now.
Post a Comment