Talk:Melody Pond (The Impossible Astronaut): Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
Line 128: Line 128:
*5. And this is my main point . . . It is a program aimed at Children!!! I realise that, like myself, many other contributors watch other sci fi shows that do over complicate things (lost, battlestar galactica), but please realise that this is not one of them. Doctor Who is designed and written so that children can understand what is happening, so why do (I presume?) adults keep arguing back and forth??.[[User:Geek Mythology|Geek Mythology]] 09:27, June 5, 2011 (UTC)
*5. And this is my main point . . . It is a program aimed at Children!!! I realise that, like myself, many other contributors watch other sci fi shows that do over complicate things (lost, battlestar galactica), but please realise that this is not one of them. Doctor Who is designed and written so that children can understand what is happening, so why do (I presume?) adults keep arguing back and forth??.[[User:Geek Mythology|Geek Mythology]] 09:27, June 5, 2011 (UTC)
She's most definitely River. As Geek Mythology has pointed out, the Little Girl was shown at the beginning of the episode in the recap, implying that she's important to the plot. It makes much more sense for the girl to be River/Melody than not. (Then this nice piece of trivia can be added: "Sydney Wade played the daughter of Alex Kingston's character in TV drama ''Marchlands''.") [[User:D0ct0r11|D0ct0r11]] 14:43, June 5, 2011 (UTC)
She's most definitely River. As Geek Mythology has pointed out, the Little Girl was shown at the beginning of the episode in the recap, implying that she's important to the plot. It makes much more sense for the girl to be River/Melody than not. (Then this nice piece of trivia can be added: "Sydney Wade played the daughter of Alex Kingston's character in TV drama ''Marchlands''.") [[User:D0ct0r11|D0ct0r11]] 14:43, June 5, 2011 (UTC)
::All that being said, we '''do not know for certain''' that the little girl is River.  I'd agree it's where the information is trending, but we need to see it '''on screen''' before we include such statements in our articles.  A counter argument is that if she's really River, why does (adult) River act so clueless as to the identity of the girl in the astronaut suit?  Until we can answer that question, we don't really '''know''' jack.  This article will remain under its current title, separate from the River article, until the mystery is '''completely explained on screen'''.  As Moffat said in the attendant ''Confidential'', the "answer" we saw in AGMGTW was as complicated as the question.  To him, any answer that's ''just'' an answer is boring. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''14:56:19 Sun&nbsp;'''05 Jun 2011&nbsp;</span>
85,404

edits

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.