Howling:Series 5 Spans 2010.

Howling: → Howling archive → The Howling archives → Series 5 Spans 2010.

This thread has been archived.

Please create a new thread on The Howling if you want to talk about this topic some more.
Please DO NOT add to this discussion.

Well, isn't that wizard. Since when was the timeline in sync with us? Though it has been noted that as of Children of Earth, The Sarah Jane Advetnures series 3, and The End of Time, the timeline is now in sycn with ours (stories that aired in 2008 and 2009 were both set in the same year). The latest stories set in 2009 wer Children of Earth in September 2009, The Sarah Jane Adventures series 3 in October and November 2009, The End of Time in December 2009. The Sarah Jane Advetnure sseries 2 was June, July, and August time 2009. But Planet of the Dead became a big discontinuity error: April 2009, seemingly before the series 4 Doctor Who finale. SIGH.

Donna's second wedding was spring 2010 (March, April, May), Jack left Earth in March 2010. Series 5 of Doctor Who spans the majority of 2010 for present day Earth stories. The Doctor meets Amy Pond in 2010, and there is an episode where Vincent Van Gogh is taken to Paris 2010- and the scene has snow! It has been reported that the Doctor meets Amy Pond in 1995 when she is a child, and later in 2010 15 years later. I was watching filming footage for the first episode of series 5 a while ago, and I believe there was some mention of how "time almost ended" in the episode dialouge. Seemingly some reference to The End of Time and how the world almost ended. As for exact dating, I reckon the first episode of series 5 will be set around April of June 2010. Let's hope specific dates are given in series 5 other than it spanning 2010. I don't like "unknown dates".

And don't go trying to say Planet of the Dead could take place afrer The End of Time. Somehow The End of Time ends up taking place before The Wedding of Sarah Jane Smith, too. Delton Menace 12:02, January 21, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the basic thrust of what you're saying — there's nothing in the 2009 specials to prevent the "present day" bits from being in 2009 — but you lose me in some of your details. Why does JE necessarily post-date POTD? Series 3 took place in 96 hours, from Francine's perspective. Why are we assuming JE takes place more than a few days after PIC? I don't recall, off the top of my head, any great time passage in the "current day" scenes. Also, how do you know COE is in September? I've only watched it entirely once, but I can't seem to find a reference anywhere in Day One. Is there a newscast, newspaper, calendar or some other obscure part of a frame I missed? Or is that a deduced date, based upon things that are said elsewhere, perhaps in a TW audio?

Not so sure why POTD vexes you enough to sigh heavily. Yes, it it's interesting to wonder when it's placed. I think I've asked the question where it fits in over at the episode page's talk. But it's hardly that important, since it's a self-contained episode, with no likely returning characters. All that matters is that, from the Doctor's perspective, it happens before TWOM and TEOT. It could very easily take place in 2010, or 2007, or 2009. Pretty sure the script doesn't tie down the narrative to even a month of the year, which would at least eliminate some years from contention, since we know it to take place on Easter. About the only thing tying it down, really, is the existence of the Oyster card and the early 21st century "vibe".

And I'm really not sure where you're getting the months for SJA series 3. Why is it in the fall of 2009, while series 2 was in the spring? WHy would you say with one breath that series 3 is in the fall of 2009, but that TWOSJS happens after TEOT?, definitively at Christmas? I admit it's a possibility that TWOSJS takes place after the sliver of a scene we have in TEOT, but it's surely not definite. The only thing I can find on screen is a logical deduction. A title card establishes "old Rani" to be from 2059 in TMWITA. It seems illogical that the story would be set 49 years in the future. Not impossible, mind, just illogical. Seems "neater" to assume that it's in 2009, but it honestly affects the narrative not a whit either way. The only thing that matters is that it's "a long way off". So what's your proof of a late 2009 setting, and why would only TWOSJS be set after TEOT?

I'm also not sure how you can be so certain of what will happen in Series 5 until it airs, based on a few rumors, or even based on one bit of dialogue confirmed by several witnesses to filming. All we have on screen right now is the end of EOT. And there, the TARDIS goes up into Earth orbit on 1 January 2005. It does not appear to enter the time vortex. And then it comes right back down, again with no sign of time travel. Using only the visual evidence before us, Series 5 could just as easily be based on a "current time" which is slightly pre-Rose. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 20:19, January 23, 2010 (UTC)

It's a vexation because Planet of the Dead, which is Easter, takes place after Journey's End - we know this because one of the human passengers remembers seeing the planets in the sky and another says the Earth was moved. Journey's End took place in June, making Planet of the Dead the Easter of the next year. Planet of the Dead takes place before SJA Series 3, because the theft of the Cup of Athelstan is referred to in Mona Lisa's Revenge at the museum.

And Planet of the Dead presumably takes place before The End of Time, because there's a "Neon by Naismith" sign in it but Naismith is arrested in The End of Time. Also SJA Series 3 presumably takes place before The End of Time if The Wedding of Sarah Jane Smith contains Luke's first face-to-face meeting with the Doctor.

Yet Children of Earth is established as September 2009 by a newspaper. Jack leaves Earth six months later, in spring 2010. Donna's wedding is also spring 2010 according to RTD's commentary on The End of Time. Since the Doctor visits them both around the same time, that fits.

Until one realizes that with the episode "Rose" being 2005 and the one year jump to "Aliens of London", Journey's End should be in 2009. Which would make Planet of the Dead, Children of Earth, SJA Series 3, and The End of Time all 2010, except that Children of Earth and The End of Time have that evidence placing them in 2009.

This could be a stable timeline with Journey's End through The End of Time all being 2009 (that's why SJA Series 2 would be summer and Series 3 fall, to fit them in the same year), if Planet of the Dead wasn't Easter. -- Noneofyourbusiness 04:11, January 24, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah I agree we really cant judge when this will be set. CzechOut is right the doctor did still seem to be in 1st January 2005, but there have been rumours that Amy Pond will meet the Doctor in 1995 and filming clips show the Doctor and Amy taking Vincent Van Gogh to Paris 2010 so we really cannot tell until actual broadcast or closer the time. -- Michael Downey 20:34, January 23, 2010 (UTC)

I believe the Doctor meets Amy Pond as a child, which would be in 1995, and then as an adult (which she is in the trailer) in 2010, and the modern day Earth stories are all set 2010. Planet of the Dead, however, is a very big continuity error. As we know, it simply doesn't take place after The End of Time, and neither does The Wedding of Sarah Jane Smith. They both take place before The End of Time, which is Christmas 2010, a few months after Children of Earth

The Next Doctor would have been set Christmas 2009 if it wasn't set in the past, but it left Christmas 200 to be chronicled in The End of Time. Another thing that fits with this years stories: Children of Earth is in September, The Sarah Jane Advetnures series 3 October and November, The End of Time in December and spring 2010, which is when Donna gets married and Jack had left Earth.

With Children of Earth September 2009 and The End of Time December 2009, The Sarah Jane Advetnures series 3 fits right between them (where it's supposed to go anyway) in October and November 2009. But both The End of Time and SJA series 3 are set after Planet of the Dead, placing it in Easter 2009. Because Planet of the Dead is in April 2009 and takes place after The Stolen Earth/Journey's End, that's the problem: they're supposed to be after April unless you disregard to reference to "planets in the sky." The only way to solve the problem is by placing Doctor Who series 4 a little further back and possibly having the finale be in early April. Because some novels regard the first majority of Torchwood series 2 as being in late 2008 partly into early 2009, it gives room for Doctor Who series 4 to be pushed further back and the finale being in early April at the latest.

Plus, Russell T. Davies said he was going to clear up the things he casued- one of which is the series being set a year ahead. He would have cleared that for Moffat by having last years and this years stories set in the same year. Delton Menace 12:05, January 24, 2010 (UTC)

What's the evidence for Journey's End taking place in June? CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 02:42, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

Beautiful Chaos' A-plot starts on May 15 and Journey's End takes place afterward, but somewhere within six weeks of it, as the framing story of Beautiful Chaos ends with Wilf and Sylvia receiving a letter that Donna told another character to give them six weeks after he last saw her. -- Noneofyourbusiness 05:11, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

I would like to point out to Delton Menance that he made a mistake if the Doctor meet Amy Pond in 1995 and then in 2010 she would only be five years old. So from what we already know she has a boyfriend so she must be either in her late teens or early twenty's at least. so i reckon she was born either in 1990 or late 1980s. User:Oliversmillie 2:44, February 2, 2010 (EST)

He meets her as a child and again as a young adult. -- Noneofyourbusiness 05:11, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

The problem is, with The End of Time being Christmas 2009, The Sarah Jane Adventures series 3 taking place not long before it in October and November time 2009, and Children of Earth in September 2009, what can be done about Planet of the Dead? That's set before them - in April! Unless we ignore the reference to their having been planets in the sky. Timeline wise, if you listen to Beautiful Chaos's date, Planet of the Dead happens before The Stolen Earth/Journey's End.

Russell T. Davies is well aware that series 4 was the in the era of the first part of 2009, and he is damn well aware that this year's stories are in later 2009 (excluding Planet of the Dead, which is seemingly not long after The Stolen Earth/Journey's End, despite being in April. However, Placing The Stolen Earth/Journey's End before May in 2009 clashes with The Waters of Mars, in which Adelaide was said to be 10 year's old. Born 12th May 1999, she was 10 when the Daleks invaded, which would mean it has to be after May 12th 2009. Equally, it is 2059, and she says the Earth was moved across space 50 years ago - 2009. But Planet of the Dead takes place after it, in April, which can't be. Nor can it be in 2010 for many reasons we know why- Naismith is in business, the recsession hasn't ended, among other things! Oh, and it also takes place before The Sarah Jane Advetnures series 3 (which references it in one episode), which takes place before The End of Time, which is Christmas 2009! UGH! Delton Menace 09:41, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

It's like Sarah Jane saying she's from 1980 in Pyramids of Mars, but the date of Mawdryn Undead making that impossible. I wouldn't be so sure he's well aware of Series 4 being in 2009, though. Did he make Adelaide's birthday May 12 1999 or did the prop people? My gut feeling is that if you asked anyone in The End of Time about the stolen planets, they'd say it was a year ago. -- Noneofyourbusiness 14:09, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

No, they would say it was half a year ago. Confirmation says The End of Time - Christmas 2009, and The Stolen Earth/Journey's End - June 2009. In between is SJA series 2 (July, August), Children of Earth (September), and SJA series 3 (October November), and then The End of Time (December). With the specials being part of series 4, they would still be part of 2009, too. Each new series is a new year on present day Earth: series 1 (majority 2006), series 2 (2007), series 3 (2008), series 4 (2009), series 5 (2010). The specials are part of series 4, too.

And indeed, the Doctor travels to 2010 throughout series 5. Dialouge, my friend. Dialouge. And because Jack left Earth in March 2010, it really fits with The End of Time when Christmas is over - the Doctor travels to Spring 2010 (MARCH, April, May). It's simply a continuity error - Russell T. Davies or Gareth Roberts didn't realise that The Stolen Earth/Journey's End happened after April.

People try to say past series happened in the same year (i.e. series 3 and 4 Doctor Who) to answer it, but that's even worse: if series 3 and 4 were both in the same year, that places series 4 before Voyage of the Damned. One person placed series 2 and 3 in the same year, placing series 3 before The Runaway Bride and placing series 4 before Voyage of the Damned. Big mistake. I like the think the bus passanger who mentioned "planets in the sky" was having a bad dream (no pun intended). Delton Menace 14:49, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

We all know Series 3 and 4 can't be in the same year, as shown by Turn Left.

It's conceivable that Davies mispoke when he said Donna's wedding was 2010 (forgetting the year skip) and Planet of the Dead, Children of Earth, SJA Series 3, and The End of Time were actually 2010, making the 2009 newspaper date in CoE a production error like the 2008 Dalek Invasion screen in The Waters of Mars. If it happened once, it can happen again (or rather, earlier). That paper wasn't dialogue, after all. Just one of many possible ways of trying to resolve the mistake that's obviously been made somewhere. Oh, and let's not forget Donna's "2008" in The Fires of Pompeii. So any system is going to render some date in some episode an error.

You frequently bring up Davies' statement that he would tie up everything for Moffat, but it's not hard fact that this applies to the year skip until he outright says so. It may not even have crossed his mind when he said that. Many people thought his statement would mean a permanent return of the Time Lords and end of the Time War mythos, but it didn't. It did apply to loose ends like Queen E.

Series 5 could be set in the same year as the specials, because the Doctor's a time traveller. I know there's a dialogue reference to Time nearly ending, but the Doctor's talking about his personal past. The Dalek Invasion of Earth was "a long time ago" for him in The Stolen Earth, but the 22nd century linearly. Alternatively, while we know he takes van Gogh to 2010 we don't know absolutely that it's Amy's home year, though it seems likely. We'll know more when it airs. Until then it's frustratingly speculative.

I'm not saying any particular way of resolving the problem is fact, I'm pointing out we don't know which is. We really need someone to talk to the producers about this. Or an updated Time Traveller's Almanac that resolves it.

This is really frustrating, and I sympathize with you and everyone else who wants to tie it up neatly. I don't want to believe that Davies forgot Rose and Aliens of London weren't in the same year either. -- Noneofyourbusiness 15:39, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

Wait a second. If I read the above correctly, the only thing tying Journey's End to June 2009 is an PROSE novel, Beautiful Chaos? That's pretty flimsy, if you ask me. I mean, contrary to popular belief, BBC does have one canon policy: a viewer cannot be forced to buy a spin-off product to make sense of things which happen in the television series. Thus, information in books which challenges a viewers perception of a televised event is actually inferior to what's on screen. Why not simply believe that the whole of Series 4 happened before Easter 2009? Again, we know the whole of Series 3 happened in 96 hours; I really don't see why PIC need be separated from JE by much more than that. Then you can slide POTD right in there at April, and everything works. Is there anything in the television series which would prevent that belief?

As for the Donna wedding issue, it actually is in dialogue that she's "getting married in the spring". That absolutely makes it the spring of the year which follows the Christmas seen in The End of Time. So, if you believe that's 2009, and I don't see why you wouldn't, then it's obviously Spring 2010 when she gets married.CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 15:56, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

:::The Beautiful Chaos/Journey's End/Planet of the Dead thing is the only reason I might not believe it's Christmas 2009. If Beautiful Chaos and Journey's End were 2009. Netty, a character from Beautiful Chaos, is referred to in The End of Time. Boom Town also referred to the novel The Monsters Inside and Captain Jack's Monster Files on the official site referred to Revenge of the Judoon.

One more thing, the Erisa Magambo page places the Torchwood novel The Undertaker's Gift, which is before Children of Earth, in November. Which would be the November of the year before? I don't have the book, so I can't tell if that's a correct interpretation of its contents. -- Noneofyourbusiness 16:05, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

Again, though, books cannot be seen as containing superior information to televised episodes. If the only source of a time for events is a book, then that's invalid information. Not saying you can't mention it in an article, but you certainly can't say that it is absolute fact. Going strictly on televised episodes, the most logical interpretation — unless I've missed something — is that Journey's End happens before Easter, 2009. Put it another way, the issue here isn't that POTD is in conflict with JE, it's that it's in conflict with Beautiful Chaos. And there's no conflict possible there, because Chaos is just a book, written well before POTD's script was finished. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 17:26, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

I don't think anyone took notice of what I said in The Waters of Mars that Adelaide was born May12th 1999, and was 10 years old when The Stolen Earth/Journey's End happened, placing them after May12th 2009. In Children of Earth 2009 is the confirmed and accepted year setting - only months after The Stolen Earth/Journey's End. The events of the Doctor Who series 4 finale were refered to as having been very recent, which fits with Children of Earth being at least months later.

When stating how long ago the origin 456 invasion of Earth happened, Rhys sites it as having happened a certain amount of years ago that - in DIALOUGE - confirmed it is 2009, too. I don't know where, but apparantly Brian Green became Prime Minister in June, the previous Prime Minister was killed during the Dalek Invasion - this would also cite the invasion as being in late May or June. Many references are made to the event in Children of Earth, as well as it being said to have been recently, showing not that much time has passed, only months. If you look on the wiki, according to commentary, Donna's wedding following the events of The End of Time was Spring 2010, early 2010. You know what that means. And it's stupid, pointless, and useless fighting aginst both commenterary, dialouge, and what we see in episodes - opinions are not fact, what the creators and episodes say is of higher value (i.e. it is fact that Children of Earth is in 2009, and the same applies to The End of Time).

The only problem here is that Planet of the Dead pre-ceds The End of Time and takes place in April, which contradicts both Beautiful Chaos and The Waters of Mars. It contradicted its following story, which places the invasion post-May 12th 2009. Yet, Planet of the Dead is cited only as being April 2009. For those ignorant enough to ignore it - dialouge throughout series 5 filming places present day Earth stories as 2010. With that being there, Torchwood series 4 will end up as 2010, and The Sarah Jane Advetnures series 4 will end up as 2010 - for five years, present day Earth stories that air in the same year always have a specific year setting (i.e. Torchwood series 2, Doctor Who series 4, The Sarah Jane Advetnures series 2 go from January 2009 to around August 2009). This is also exampled in: last few stories of Torchwood series 1 are in 2008, Doctor Who seires 3 is 2008, and The Sarah Jane Advetnures series 1 is 2008 - they all aire din the same year. Therefore, with series 5 seeing 2010, Torchwood series 4 and The Sarah Jane Advetnures series 4 will see 2010. The year-ahead ended when the 2008 Christmas special didn't chronicle 2009, but was instead set in the past, allowing The End of Time to take place the time it aired and fit Children of Earth and The Saraj Jane Advetnures series 3 before it and after series 2 of The Sarah Jane Adventures. Also, by these placments, every single month of 2009 has been chronicled by at least one story, it feels complete. Delton Menace 09:25, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, couple of points here. Please don't call people "ignorant" just because they're not taking notice of episodes that haven't even aired yet. Until episodes are aired, going off of presumed dialogue is a very risky thing on this wiki — something which can easily lead to an awful lot of duplication of effort. We cannot build this wiki on rumors and literal hearsay.

Second, commentaries are almost never valid resources for narrative information. I've seen you make this sort of remark before, but you really need to understand that just because a member of the production staff makes a public commment about an episode, that doesn't make it an in-universe "truth". We can report that "RTD said the temperature of Midnight was -156 degrees Kelvin," in a background/behind the scenes section, but we can't definitively enter that as the temperature of Midnight unless it explicitly says so in the episode. I think there's really only one sort of case where commentaries do contain legitimate information about the narrative, but I'll talk about that in a moment.

Now, though, time to tackle the WOM/POTD "contradiction". I put that in quotes, cause there really isn't one — unless you wanna go out of your way to create it. It's widely accepted that the on-screen graphics for WOM are riddled with continuity errors, not to mention basic typos. And that's the only place you're getting 12 May 1999 as Adelaide's date of birth. In fact, the graphic that establishes her birthday is itself internally inconsistent. Here's the exact sentence, with which I'm sure you're already familiar:

"Brooke, born in Finchley, North London on 12 May 1999 lost her parents at the age of 10 when they were pronounced missing and presumed dead after the Dalek invasion of 2008."

There's no way you can be born in 1999, but 10 years old in 2008. The only years in which you can be 10 if you're born in 1999 are 2009 and 2010.

Now, i know what you're going to say. "Yes, yes, everyone knows the error is that the Dalek invasion wasn't in 2008. It's established to be in 2009 through other sources, so that's what we "nip/tuck" here. And if you change the Dalek Invasion date to 2009, then it must've occurred after her birthday, which therefore creates this POTD/WOM incompatibility."

But the thing is, you have to change what we see on screen in order to believe the graphic. So, why stop with just the Dalek Invasion date? I mean, we have to change what it says about Adelaide's granddaughter's crew, or believe through some freak effect, her crew all have the same names as her grandmother's. So why not change Adelaide's birthdate, too? I honestly don't see a way that you can logically argue to change only one thing about the graphics.

See, the weird thing is that this one of the very few cases in which the commentary actually does provide you with valuable behind-the-scenes information that you can use to identify the validity of a narrative resource. RTD says the graphics were written by a trainee script editor, and that they weren't a part of the script. He also makes it very clear that he himself didn't double-check the newbie's work. So this trainee naturally made mistakes and they weren't caught. The graphics are therefore clearly gaffes, which shouldn't be treated seriously by this wiki. Fine, the close-ups which show information changing, that's valid, because that part — like the location of Adelaide's death changing from Mars to Earth — was in the script and was therefore the focus of the director's attention. But the stuff you'd actually have to freeze frame to see? Nah, that stuff has too many obvious errors to be consider valid.

Thus what we're left with is dialogue. It's 2059. The Doctor says the Dalek invasion happened "50 years ago". Adelaide was a girl when it happened. We don't know, from dialogue, how old she was at the time of Dalek incident. So we are completely free to put Journey's End before Easter 2009. Personally, I think that's where the inquiry should stop, but let's press ahead for those who really feel the need to somehow include the graphics.

At least twice we have a graphic on screen which merely gives the years of her life as 1999-2059. And that's fine, too. She can be born in early 1999 and still have JE prior to Easter. It's only the one graphic which I've quoted before, that gives a problem. So, based both on the totality of the dialogue, but the majority of the graphics, there's nothing about WOM which says POTD can't come after JE. It's only when we get to a level of detail that is obviously flawed, and for which the commentary gives adequate explanation for why it is flawed, that we run into a problem. So we should ignore it and go for the most sensible reading of the televised chronology. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 17:14, February 4, 2010 (UTC)