Tech, Bureaucrats, emailconfirmed, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, threadmoderator
113,918
edits
More actions
m
no edit summary
No edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
but Roses{{ | but Roses{{Archive|Reference desk archives}} | ||
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes: ~~~~ --> | <!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes: ~~~~ --> | ||
This continuity error first came to my attention when I was reading the doctor who wiki article on [[The Stolen Earth]].The dalek invasion of earth shown during this episode took place during early 2009,but if this is the case how did [[Henry van Statten]] not know what the living creature he had in his vault was in [[Dalek (TV story)]]? even though this episode takes place in 2012 only three years later.My first thought was that it was not really 2012 and the tardis scanner was somehow wrong,but when I checked my copy of the series one shooting scripts several direct references were made to 2012 in the stage directions ''They are wearing the 2012 equivilant of a bluetooth earpiece'',''The computer scrolls with complicated and not necassarily legible 2012 text.'' | This continuity error first came to my attention when I was reading the doctor who wiki article on [[The Stolen Earth]].The dalek invasion of earth shown during this episode took place during early 2009,but if this is the case how did [[Henry van Statten]] not know what the living creature he had in his vault was in [[Dalek (TV story)]]? even though this episode takes place in 2012 only three years later.My first thought was that it was not really 2012 and the tardis scanner was somehow wrong,but when I checked my copy of the series one shooting scripts several direct references were made to 2012 in the stage directions ''They are wearing the 2012 equivilant of a bluetooth earpiece'',''The computer scrolls with complicated and not necassarily legible 2012 text.'' | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Perhaps van Statten did know about the invasion, but being miles underground, he and his staff decided to ride it out there, and therefore may not have got a close up view of the Daleks, and then wouldn't know about their true identity when he found his one. Also, he could have simply forgotten about the name "Dalek" after seeing it on television afterwards or, as I've seen somewhere before, he preferred the name Metaltron. Again, perhaps he had no communications in the museum and didn't see images of the Daleks at all, far or close. | Perhaps van Statten did know about the invasion, but being miles underground, he and his staff decided to ride it out there, and therefore may not have got a close up view of the Daleks, and then wouldn't know about their true identity when he found his one. Also, he could have simply forgotten about the name "Dalek" after seeing it on television afterwards or, as I've seen somewhere before, he preferred the name Metaltron. Again, perhaps he had no communications in the museum and didn't see images of the Daleks at all, far or close. | ||
::"Continuity error" is a term somewhat difficult to ascribe in the [[Whoniverse]], because of the central, time-traveling premise of ''Doctor Who''. The Doctor does actually change the progression of time, because in some cases it is "in flux" ([[ | ::"Continuity error" is a term somewhat difficult to ascribe in the [[Whoniverse]], because of the central, time-traveling premise of ''Doctor Who''. The Doctor does actually change the progression of time, because in some cases it is "in flux" ([[TV]]: ''[[The Fires of Pompeii]]''). It's also been noted that it's not a "strict progression of cause to effect" ([[TV]]: ''[[Blink]]'') We shouldn't expect that what we see in an early episode will necessarily be true by a later one. | ||
::The relationship between Daleks and the world hinges largely on Rose (and, later, Martha and Donna). It is easiest to understand what's going on by looking at the companion's timeline. Rose meets the lone Dalek with the Ninth Doctor in 2012. That Dalek dies. End of story. Except that we discover that the Emperor has, in a similar fashion to that lone Dalek, fallen through the "cracks" of the Time War and ended up in our relative future. Rose destroys all these Daleks. Next she, the Doctor and Mickey fall into the "Pete's World" universe. Their dance between dimensions, along with the two Torchwoods' later ramblings, fractures the walls between realities. This allows the Cult of Skaro to meet Rose in 2008. These Daleks become known to the broader world, which would seem to be a continuity error with ''Dalek''. But it's not. History, through Rose's travels, has gotten '''re-written'''. Therefore, both episodes, and the later ''Stolen Earth'', are true. From Rose's perspective, it's perfectly true that in 2012, Van Statten had a Dalek and he didn't know what it was. But then, '''at a later point in Rose's life''' in 2008, the world meets the Daleks in a big way. Meanwhile, ''Dalek'' doesn't account for the fact that Daleks were visibly present during the construction of the Empire State Building. | ::The relationship between Daleks and the world hinges largely on Rose (and, later, Martha and Donna). It is easiest to understand what's going on by looking at the companion's timeline. Rose meets the lone Dalek with the Ninth Doctor in 2012. That Dalek dies. End of story. Except that we discover that the Emperor has, in a similar fashion to that lone Dalek, fallen through the "cracks" of the Time War and ended up in our relative future. Rose destroys all these Daleks. Next she, the Doctor and Mickey fall into the "Pete's World" universe. Their dance between dimensions, along with the two Torchwoods' later ramblings, fractures the walls between realities. This allows the Cult of Skaro to meet Rose in 2008. These Daleks become known to the broader world, which would seem to be a continuity error with ''Dalek''. But it's not. History, through Rose's travels, has gotten '''re-written'''. Therefore, both episodes, and the later ''Stolen Earth'', are true. From Rose's perspective, it's perfectly true that in 2012, Van Statten had a Dalek and he didn't know what it was. But then, '''at a later point in Rose's life''' in 2008, the world meets the Daleks in a big way. Meanwhile, ''Dalek'' doesn't account for the fact that Daleks were visibly present during the construction of the Empire State Building. | ||
::Do ''Doomsday'' and ''Stolen Earth'' likely change the events of ''Dalek''? Should the many accounts of the construction of the Empire State Building have mentioned the Daleks? Of course. But the fact that ''Dalek'' ignores these events is not a continuity "error". It's just a possibility of time travel. As we discover in ''[[The Unquiet Dead]]'', Rose '''can''' die in the 19th century, despite the changes this would cause to the time line. Time is mutable, is "in flux" at certain points. Likewise, Katarina can die in her far future, and Susan and Vicki leave the TARDIS in what is their own personal past. Vicki must certainly have died centuries before she was born, and her unrecorded adventures as Cressida must certainly have had ''some'' kind of influence on the development of human history. Are these continuity errors? No. They're just examples of [[temporal paradox]]es (or [[timey-wimey]]-ness), both of which are simply a part of the programme. As we learn in ''[[Turn Left]]'' and ''[[Father's Day]], most of the time, these changes to the timeline are automatically assimilated by the time-line. But if the change is sufficiently big, a whole new reality can unfold. We can reasonably assert that the changes caused by Daleks appearing before 2012 in the objective timeline, but after 2012 in Rose's personal timeline received some natural compensation by the objective timeline. They weren't, like Donna's decision to turn left, big enough deals to unravel the main Earth timeline. | ::Do ''Doomsday'' and ''Stolen Earth'' likely change the events of ''Dalek''? Should the many accounts of the construction of the Empire State Building have mentioned the Daleks? Of course. But the fact that ''Dalek'' ignores these events is not a continuity "error". It's just a possibility of time travel. As we discover in ''[[The Unquiet Dead]]'', Rose '''can''' die in the 19th century, despite the changes this would cause to the time line. Time is mutable, is "in flux" at certain points. Likewise, Katarina can die in her far future, and Susan and Vicki leave the TARDIS in what is their own personal past. Vicki must certainly have died centuries before she was born, and her unrecorded adventures as Cressida must certainly have had ''some'' kind of influence on the development of human history. Are these continuity errors? No. They're just examples of [[temporal paradox]]es (or [[timey-wimey]]-ness), both of which are simply a part of the programme. As we learn in ''[[Turn Left]]'' and ''[[Father's Day (TV story)|Father's Day]]'', most of the time, these changes to the timeline are automatically assimilated by the time-line. But if the change is sufficiently big, a whole new reality can unfold. We can reasonably assert that the changes caused by Daleks appearing before 2012 in the objective timeline, but after 2012 in Rose's personal timeline received some natural compensation by the objective timeline. They weren't, like Donna's decision to turn left, big enough deals to unravel the main Earth timeline. | ||
::Maybe this means that Van Statten's new "foreknowledge" of the Daleks doesn't change the basic structure of that story. Sure, he now has some idea of what Daleks are, but he's still arrogant and greedy enough to believe he can learn something useful from an individual Daleks. Foreknowledge, in other words, doesn't make him any less stupid. So he still does basically the same stuff, still needs to be rescued by the Doctor, and still gets mindwiped and dumped "somewhere beginning with 'S'". Or maybe those later stories so changed the events of ''Dalek'' that now the version we saw actually belongs to "Pete's World". Hell, maybe a Van Statten with greater knowledge of the Daleks was able to inform the creation of the Cybus Cybermen. | ::Maybe this means that Van Statten's new "foreknowledge" of the Daleks doesn't change the basic structure of that story. Sure, he now has some idea of what Daleks are, but he's still arrogant and greedy enough to believe he can learn something useful from an individual Daleks. Foreknowledge, in other words, doesn't make him any less stupid. So he still does basically the same stuff, still needs to be rescued by the Doctor, and still gets mindwiped and dumped "somewhere beginning with 'S'". Or maybe those later stories so changed the events of ''Dalek'' that now the version we saw actually belongs to "Pete's World". Hell, maybe a Van Statten with greater knowledge of the Daleks was able to inform the creation of the Cybus Cybermen. | ||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
::::Something thats come to light recently about this issue is that the dalek invasion of 2009(or was it 2008 according to that news website from the waters of mars) was essential to adelaide brooke's life and thus the rest of earth's history.So if her interest in space travel was a fixed point in time then maybe the dalek that inspireed her was as well.Although that means that the stolen earth was not a change of history,unless of course it was an established event that history would be changed (that makes your head hurt) --[[User:666hotline|666hotline]] 20:11, December 30, 2009 (UTC) | ::::Something thats come to light recently about this issue is that the dalek invasion of 2009(or was it 2008 according to that news website from the waters of mars) was essential to adelaide brooke's life and thus the rest of earth's history.So if her interest in space travel was a fixed point in time then maybe the dalek that inspireed her was as well.Although that means that the stolen earth was not a change of history,unless of course it was an established event that history would be changed (that makes your head hurt) --[[User:666hotline|666hotline]] 20:11, December 30, 2009 (UTC) | ||
::::THere is another issue with that, because the recording entry for Adelaide said, "she lost her parents at the age of 10 during the Dalek Invasion of Earth 2008" but her Birthday clearly shown as May 1999, so definitifely an Error here. Tom (August 10, 2010) | |||
Modern day Earth stories are always set a year ahead of their airdate, the thing in The Waters of Mars was quite an obvious misprint. Abelaide herself (in 2059) says the event happened 50 years ago, making it 2009. | Modern day Earth stories are always set a year ahead of their airdate, the thing in The Waters of Mars was quite an obvious misprint. Abelaide herself (in 2059) says the event happened 50 years ago, making it 2009. | ||
| Line 42: | Line 43: | ||
: Although the details are wrong, the basic idea he was suggesting could be right. We have no idea why Amy, from 2010, has no memory of the Daleks and their invasions. Until we know the explanation, we can't rule out the possibility that whatever it is won't also cover why Henry van Statten and his people, from 2012, have no memory of those same events. (It might even explain why Zoe, who's from at least 2008, probably a little later, maybe a lot later, didn't know about the Daleks until the Doctor showed her the reruns of his earlier episodes.) --[[Special:Contributions/99.50.120.236|99.50.120.236]] 05:27, April 22, 2010 (UTC) | : Although the details are wrong, the basic idea he was suggesting could be right. We have no idea why Amy, from 2010, has no memory of the Daleks and their invasions. Until we know the explanation, we can't rule out the possibility that whatever it is won't also cover why Henry van Statten and his people, from 2012, have no memory of those same events. (It might even explain why Zoe, who's from at least 2008, probably a little later, maybe a lot later, didn't know about the Daleks until the Doctor showed her the reruns of his earlier episodes.) --[[Special:Contributions/99.50.120.236|99.50.120.236]] 05:27, April 22, 2010 (UTC) | ||
Hopefully this will cover Van Statten being unaware, too, like you said. It still support my theroy that the Daleks never invaded now, that it was all erased, hence why Amy doesn't remember ever seeing them or the planets in the sky - like he said, you wouldn't forget that. Could be a big fat reset caused by some unknown entity. [[User:Delton Menace|Delton Menace]] 10:59, April 22, 2010 (UTC) | |||