5,435
edits
Theory:Doctor Who television discontinuity and plot holes/Mindwarp (edit)
Revision as of 20:50, 11 August 2010
, 11 August 2010no edit summary
(moving stuff over from story page) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{discontinuity}} | {{discontinuity}} | ||
*How does the Inquisitor know the events at the stories end - she's supposed to be impartial, and is supposed to be watching this for the first time? | *How does the Inquisitor know the events at the stories end - she's supposed to be impartial, and is supposed to be watching this for the first time? | ||
::Although she is indeed probably seeing the evidence for the first time during the trial, there's no reason to assume she wasn't briefed on it beforehand to some degree. That would be consistent with actions around many trials held on Earth, for example. | |||
*Why hasn't [[Leela]] or [[Romana]] testified for the Doctor as they are on [[Gallifrey]]? | *Why hasn't [[Leela]] or [[Romana]] testified for the Doctor as they are on [[Gallifrey]]? | ||
::The trial is clearly established as not taking place on Gallifrey | ::The trial is clearly established as not taking place on Gallifrey. And Romana is in E-Space. | ||
*What actually happens? After Part 1 of Mindwarp, is the rest a lie? Are parts of the story lies? Is the Doctor behaving erratically? Is this actually an alternate Doctor created by the Valeyard? Did the beach interrogation actually take place at all? | *What actually happens? After Part 1 of Mindwarp, is the rest a lie? Are parts of the story lies? Is the Doctor behaving erratically? Is this actually an alternate Doctor created by the Valeyard? Did the beach interrogation actually take place at all? | ||
::We only see the altered version, and there is no need for us to go back and see how it all "really" happened. As explained during the story, much of what was shown is inaccurate. It either didn't happen at all or happened a different way. | |||
*Despite a specific reference to the sting on Kiv's new body, it never becomes a factor in the story - that is, no-one is stung by Kiv and no-one mentions the sting again. So why include it at all, or, if an instance of someone being stung was edited out, why not edit out this reference as well? | *Despite a specific reference to the sting on Kiv's new body, it never becomes a factor in the story - that is, no-one is stung by Kiv and no-one mentions the sting again. So why include it at all, or, if an instance of someone being stung was edited out, why not edit out this reference as well? | ||
::Why would it have to be used just because it's referenced? This would only be an error if sometime later or before there was a contradictory reference. | |||