Almost immediately after the Christmas special, I stated that this season made it seem like The Doctor was dreaming. There are weird combinations of images, references, characters, and villains from The Doctor’s past. As many people have noticed, there are a great deal of Rose references, for starters. Of course, if he were dreaming, there would be a lot of holes in the story, but there is more than one way to dream, however.
Read More
Anonymous asked: What are your Clara theories?
Here are some hints:
1. I’ve said it before, basically.
2. There is a reason she is the perfect companion-a combination of all the other companions, with a lot in common with Rose. And there is a reason she does things The Doctor has always wanted, like how she doesn’t wander off.
3. And the reason is because that is what The Doctor wants.
Clara Oswin Oswald is the harbinger of doom.
The canary-in-the-coal-mine of the universe and time collapsing.
Of the void collapsing.
That’s why Rose and Ten and (presumably) other Doctors can appear.
That’s why Clara can exist in multiple spots in time, in multiple timelines, at the same point in her life. And die every time, only to re-appear.
And why the Doctor ends up on the fields to Trenzalor revealing who he truly is.
This is my theory about Oswin and the upcoming series of Doctor Who. If you haven’t seen The Snowmen, don’t read unless you love spoilers and want to marry them.
“Is The Doctor dreaming?” is something I thought repeatedly during the Christmas special. There are so many oddly placed references to past episodes and reincarnations that it seemed like they were fragmented aspects of the Doctor’s subconscious.
Let’s start with the characters. Obviously, Vastra, Jenny, Strax, and Oswin are all characters that have occurred before. Oswin is magically alive again, despite (presumably) dying in her previous appearance AND having been Dalekified. Not only is she not dead, but she is sans a metal shell. This is the first hint something is weird.
The second is the fact that Strax is also not dead. The only explanation we get is that a friend of the Doctor’s revived him. You know when you’re having a dream and you’re all like riding a unicorn to the Stop & Go by your house and the clerk is all like, “Where did you get the unicorn,” and your dream logic is like, “Oh, my friend beat a leprechaun in a fight and won it.” That’s what the Doctor’s explanation for Strax being alive felt like. In dream logic, it makes perfect sense. When you wake up, it makes none. Like, no one stopped him and was like, “Holy shit, you have a friend who can control life and death? Are you estranged with him because you have a lot of people die around you and you never told us that you knew a guy who could do that stuff.”
Read More
I forgot to write this, but this is an idea I’ve been sitting on since Angels Take Manhattan.
As most of you know, something was off about the paper Amy was reading at the start of Angels.

As you can see, it says “Detroit Lions Win Super Bowl.”
Read More
Warning: Some of my thoughts come from the promotional images released by the BBC this week, and the trailers. If you are wanting to avoid any sort of spoilers, don’t read this. There are no actual spoilers, however. I know nothing.
Remember last year, when the running joke was how many times Rory had died? I have a feeling that after this week’s episode, they won’t be as funny anymore.
I think Rory is about to be captured by the Angels. He will be sent back to 1938, where, in theory, he will live out the rest of his life and die alone. Last year, the mid-season finale involved Rory and The Doctor coming to Amy’s rescue. Now, it’s Amy’s turn to do the rescuing. A theme for Rory and Amy’s relationship, stated explicitly in Asylum of the Daleks, is that Rory loves Amy more than she ever loved him. I feel like the best conclusion to this arc is for Amy to make some kind of sacrifice to make sure Rory doesn’t die alone.
Read More
Anonymous asked: What do you think about the theory that The Doctor is visiting the Ponds in reverse order (a la River Song)? I've seen that idea floating around and was curious about your thoughts.
Spoilers, Series 7
Probably not. There is no real reference in the episodes to any sort of past (or future) events, so it’s tough to tell, but, in “Dinosaurs,” The Doctor asks how her job is going, implying he knew what she was doing before he picked her up. She says she quit, and he says that she quit the one before that, too, again, implying that he at least knows what she was doing. Both lines imply he has been seeing them in regular chronological order.
In other words, if he were truly going “backwards,” like he was with River, he wouldn’t know Amy had a job.
In “Mercy,” The Doctor made reference to Rory leaving his phone charger in Henry VIII’s suite. Rory seems to acknowledge he did, and didn’t seem confused by it. Again, The Doctor implying something Rory did in Rory’s own past.
Sure, there are convoluted explanations why he may, but without more than a couple funny looks as evidence, I don’t think I need to delve more.
The Doctor may know how the Ponds end, given some wibbly wobbily-ness, but I seriously doubt he’s visiting them in reverse order.
But come on…
Average guy who never travels, suddenly finds himself on a spaceship interacting with aliens and weirdly emotive robots.
Always carries a *trowel*
And the final scene with him relaxing on the edge of space drinking tea is very Arthur Dent.
I can just see Rory’s dad making sandwiches for aliens one day.
Spoilers from Series 7, episode 1
Series 7 allegedly takes a step away from many of the long series arcs and mysteries that drove the previous series (much to the chagrin of me, whose niche seems to be unraveling the “complicatedness” of Moffat’s writing. That, and cat jokes). After watching the episode, this seems to be true.
Easy stuff first: Some people seem to think Skaro was time locked just like Gallifrey. It’s not.
See, that was easy.
I think the main question most people have is how Oswin ends up being The Doctor’s companion, seeing as she’s 1) a Dalek, and 2) presumably dead.
Read More

It just so happens that the next episode in the series I was set to review was one featuring Charles Dickens. It also just so happens to be Charles Dickens’ birthday. Coincidence? Definitely (Note: this gives you a rough idea how long it takes me to finish these things). In case you are new to this, I write semi-reviews of shows, but with a more positive twist, focusing on why you should have enjoyed it, instead of nit-picking it to death. You can find the previous “Why You Should Have Liked It” here.
So here is why you should have liked The Unquiet Dead, you unappeasable ass:
Read More