Talk:Weeping Angel: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
== Christ the Redeemer: Harmless representation of a religious icon or the God of the Lonely Assassins? == | == Christ the Redeemer: Harmless representation of a religious icon or the God of the Lonely Assassins? == | ||
What do you think? | What do you think? [[Usertalk:MoonshadowDark]] | ||
Revision as of 00:50, 17 May 2013
 |
Archives: #1 |
|---|
How does statue become a weeping angel? I am assuming the French didnt create the weeping angel that is the Statue of Liberty so how did it become an angel
- In "The Angels Take Manhattan", River says that the angels have "taken over" every statue in New York, so it could be that they can possess the statues, convert them somehow, or perhaps they could even be projecting their consciousness into the statues in order to animate them. Ensephylon ☎ 23:15, April 27, 2013 (UTC)
Contradiction?
Is there any explanation for the fact that, in The Time of Angels/Flesh and Stone, the angels have no problem moving when they’re able to see each other? I thought Blink firmly established that they can’t. —Frungi ☎ 05:51, May 13, 2013 (UTC)
- Are there eyes actually open in Time of Angels/Flesh and Stone? I remember seeing very limited use of the open eyes and I certainly don't remember enough open eyes to lock the angels. If you angel has their eyes open and is looking at other angels, those angels are quantum-locked. But the angel that's looking can close it's eyes unless someone looking at it is preventing that.
- Also, there are very obvious issues with the angels. Sally Sparrow has photographs of the angels and looks at them in the eye which is a clear problem in regards to the later precept "that which holds the image of an angel becomes an angel". Anoted ☎ 10:07, May 13, 2013 (UTC)
Christ the Redeemer: Harmless representation of a religious icon or the God of the Lonely Assassins?
What do you think? Usertalk:MoonshadowDark
