In the spirit that someone should perhaps say something a little negative... what did we think of Mels? I had no issue of the character, maybe it was the actress. It just seemed a little OTT and didn't really fit into what we know about Rory and Amy's childhoods in Leadworth. It all makes sense, but... how can Amy feel that Leadworth is "dull" if her best friend there is forever stealing buses and suchlike?
Just watched it again, amazed at how cleverly it all comes together. Haven't looked at response in other communities yet, but I'm guessing it will be the usual "Mary Sue"/"deus ex machina"/"plot holes" nonsense from people who don't really understand the terms.
I do agree about Mels being... idk, she just didn't seem to fit with their implied past, she seemed like the kind of thing that *would have come up before*. I would say 'oh, well, I guess she was just eaten by the Silence and she just wasn't in the timeline of disappearing people season 5' except clearly River was in that timeline. I mean, I think they lampshaded the fact that this was a massive retcon, but it was still grating.
I also just wish that they hadn't taken away the possibility of there being another actress playing River Song--I love Alex Kingston, I wouldn't *want* her changed out, but this means there can't be a first River and a second River etc like there's the 9/10/11th doctors, at least, not as the Doctor's lover/confidant/companion instead of as a deranged assassin. Though maybe the resolution of the doctor's death will somehow fix this too. (Or who knows maybe she was just a flesh avatar! j/k) (also, from a nonlinear nonsubjective standpoint, she'd have to be the nth River/n-1th River/n-2th River of timey-wimey stuff, which would be very confusing.)
Yeah, that was exactly it. Mels seemed like the kind of person who would have been involved before in some way. However, if she had been, it would have instantly led to tons of speculation and possibly spoiled the "omg, she's River" moment.
I think River sort of had to give up the regenerations in order to make the ending of the Library story work. And I quite like the idea that only Alex Kingston can play her now, but that's because I find it weird to think that somebody could be writing River's dialogue once Moffat is gone.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-27 10:03 pm (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2011-08-28 07:17 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2011-08-28 01:16 am (UTC)From:This show just keeps getting better and better!
Mofffaaaatttt!!!!
no subject
Date: 2011-08-28 07:18 am (UTC)From:OMG ROFL. :)
no subject
Date: 2011-08-28 12:34 pm (UTC)From:Just watched it again, amazed at how cleverly it all comes together. Haven't looked at response in other communities yet, but I'm guessing it will be the usual "Mary Sue"/"deus ex machina"/"plot holes" nonsense from people who don't really understand the terms.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-29 08:07 am (UTC)From:I also just wish that they hadn't taken away the possibility of there being another actress playing River Song--I love Alex Kingston, I wouldn't *want* her changed out, but this means there can't be a first River and a second River etc like there's the 9/10/11th doctors, at least, not as the Doctor's lover/confidant/companion instead of as a deranged assassin. Though maybe the resolution of the doctor's death will somehow fix this too. (Or who knows maybe she was just a flesh avatar! j/k) (also, from a nonlinear nonsubjective standpoint, she'd have to be the nth River/n-1th River/n-2th River of timey-wimey stuff, which would be very confusing.)
no subject
Date: 2011-08-29 02:58 pm (UTC)From:I think River sort of had to give up the regenerations in order to make the ending of the Library story work. And I quite like the idea that only Alex Kingston can play her now, but that's because I find it weird to think that somebody could be writing River's dialogue once Moffat is gone.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-29 08:10 am (UTC)From: