Talk:Blink (TV story)/Archive 1

	This page is an archive. Please do not make any edits here. Edit the active conversation only.

Is it me, or does Billy Shipton have a Jamaican accent, or at least from somewhere in the Caribbean?--MaGnUs 06:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

The Angels actors

Is there is a list anywhere of the actors who played the Angels? They should be listed here. 23skidoo 00:33, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

How did the TARDIS move to Wester Drumlins?

Roughly mid episode the TARDIS is in Police storage, but by the end it has moved to the basement of Wester Drumlins (where it's found by Sally etc etc). Since The Doctor is in 1969 at this point then it wasn't piloted there, and the Angels don't have access. The only thing I can think of is that the Angels moved it, but how? No matter how fast they are it seems impossible to move a large blue box across a populated area without someone seeing them, and therefore trapping them in Quantum Lock. (Also, not really sure how it got into the basement anyway, I wouldn't want to move a Police Box down a flight of stairs)

Any other theories? AmazingJim 06:28, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Maybe the Doctor parked the TARDIS in Wester Drumlins to take care of some monster, and then he and Martha got transported back in time by the Weeping Angels, leaving the TARDIS there. In fact, he could get transported to 1969 soon after the end of the episode, because he was in the area at that time.Doc Who10 07:18, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry DocWho10, maybe I wasn't clear. When Sally first meets Billy Shipton the TARDIS is in a Police Garage with the cars found at the house, which your explanation for is probably right, but how did it move from the Garage to the House basement later in the episode. The Police probably moved it from the house to the garage on a truck (seen that done elsewhere), but how did it get back to the house between the time Billy dissappeared and Sally found it after watching the DVD. There's nothing on the DVD commentary track about it either, just checked that through today. AmazingJim

The implication was that the Angels moved it. But as you say, that seems difficult to pull off. Monkey with a Gun 02:45, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. I see your point. Sorry, I mustn't have been thinking (I just havn't seen that episode here, I thought you meant that the TARDIS was at the house in the beginning of the story, or something like that). I wonder how it happened? - Doc Who10 04:01, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm certain that the weeping angels moved it.

they probably have teleport powers/moved it through a way that no one saw them, anyway I heard they're coming back in series 5 so I guess the answer lies there

I'll point out three things here. One: Nobody ever notices the Police Box even when it's blatantly out of place. Two: Nobody bothers to worry about a stone statue. Even an out of place one. Three: The Angels have had literally eons perfecting the art of being sneaky. MrCatharsis 20:54, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

Okay clutching at straws here but maybe the TARDIS in the police station was a future TARDIS which the doctor parked there to allow events happening to match the notes that he got from sally, maybe the TARDIS that was in the basement was parked there by the doctor who then was teleported back to 1969. Sorry this seems confusing. Right going from the doctors time line, he received the folder from sally sparrow having no previous knowledge of his future events and her past events. He then goes to proceed to land the TARDIS in two different places, the place where the police move the TARDIS to the police garage(the doctor very well could have been in the TARDIS at the time) he has to do this to allow sally sparrow from following the bread crumbs. He then dematerialises to an earlier stage to the house basement, he takes the folder with him(or very well learns it off by heart) knowing that he will be transported to the past along with martha. I hope that made some kind of sense, I don't think I'm creating any new paradoxes as I am sticking to the original paradox Kingtuter 14:12, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

Reference of the year gap at the end

I'm fairly sure I remember seeing the "One Year Later" message in the broadcast...ProtoKun7 22:07, January 4, 2010 (UTC)

• I never saw it on the CBC in Canada and it's not on the DVD. It was originally scripted - confirmed in several sources - but I can't find anything to support that it actually appeared on screen. Maybe in only certain parts of the UK? 23skidoo 20:55, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
• It has to be included as canon - it has "One Year Later" clearly labelled between the scene where Sally and Larry leave the Weeping Angles and the establishing shot of the DVD store on my DVD set for Season 3 (region 2); I cannot believe this is in doubt. I must go back on my recording of the broadcast version, I can believe that it might not have been present there. But, clearly, the producers decided that it was canon enough to be later included on the DVDs, and this article should reflect that. It currently has a doubt cast on the duration of time passed at one point in the article.

Discontinuity or self-referentiality?

I rather take exception with the fact that this is included in the discontinuity and errors section:

"They [the characters] look away from the angels many times but they [the angels] don't move. Someone or thing is watching them. Some have proposed, semi-jokingly, that they are reacting to the camera and the viewer observing them."

This is an excellent (and very elegant) example of the self-referentiality device (widely used in many television shows, movies and books), by which the audience becomes part of the action. The episode deliberately breaks the "fourth wall" between the action and the audience. As a television criticism junkie, I am endlessly tickled by the beauty of this device and the subtlety with which it's used here.

Come weigh in on the subject on my blog, at http://bit.ly/4W6rxA!

• Although it's an interesting concept, it is an error in the context of Doctor Who as, in theory, it's not supposed to break the 4th wall. And, most important, no one connected with the series has come forward to say it was intentional. That said, whether it's actually an error is unclear because nothing in the episode suggests exactly how they move. Yes, the Doctor says they move quickly. But so does a cat - after spending 20 minutes sitting motionless watching the fly on the wall before it pounces. That's exactly how I saw the Angels' movement. 23skidoo 20:58, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

• Could it have something to do with looking at them from the corner of one's eye? A perception filter can make you miss an entire room, but you still see it from the corner of your eye, just don't take notice of it. Therefore maybe one should take the 'looking at them' more broadly? --Samoth 20:17, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

• Well, this is one of the reasons the discon sections are getting moved to Theory:Doctor Who television discontinuity and plot holes. This tone, and especially the reference to a blog, are clearly inappropriate to the tone of an encyclopedia article. However, I have no problem with that kind of language, once the section is moved to the Forums. I'll just go do that now, so that it doesn't trouble us any longer here. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 20:26, April 22, 2010 (UTC)
• I must say that Blink had me on the edge of my seat, staring at the screen the entire time. I very much got the feeling that I had to watch the Weeping Angels or they could jump out of the screen and get at me. The idea that this was a plot device to get viewers more enraptured in the story is definitely not too farfetched. MrCatharsis 20:57, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

  As of "The Time of Angels," you do have to keep watching to prevent the Angels from coming out of the screen and getting you. And as of "Flesh and Stone," watching the episode in the real world does not protect inattentive in-universe characters. Memcginn 22:02, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

The cell phone problem

Some horror/thriller writers (well, the less creative ones) hate mobile phones; not much of a story if the protagonists can call for help. Living before them, in, say, 1963, normally avoids this "problem" — but not if you're the Doctor with a certain sonic tool! So, any good fan theories on why he couldn't have used universal roaming with Martha's phone?

Oh wait, I've got one now — he knew he would have to go through the rigmarole of the DVD extras, because thanks to Sally's green file, he knew it had "already happened", and he would need to avoid a paradox. Never mind… maybe? Now I'm suddenly thinking of a different, closely related question — why did he need Lawrence's shorthand of Sally's words at all? He could have just read his own lines, whose "true" author is in fact not him but whatever it is that creates paradoxically "appearing" information in stable time loops (like if you sent Hamlet back in time to Shakespeare, and he copies it, and it's the play you send back, etc). Then again, maybe having some of her words there would help give him context for his words, making him deliver them right — perhaps even the Doctor's brain can hurt thinking about time travel! 72.72.237.120 23:39, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

What movie is being watched when Sally first enters the video store?

Larry's colleague is watching a video when Sally first enters the store (to give Larry the message from his sister). Has anyone figured out which film? 76.200.189.217 00:40, March 12, 2010 (UTC)

Larry

Is it just me or does the Doctor look surprised when he sees Larry? Mc hammark 20:06, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

So, exactly how did this story start?

The entire episode is about getting the TARDIS back to the Doctor, because he and Martha got separated from it by a Weeping Angel.

But what were they doing at Wester Drumlins in 2007 in the first place? What brought the TARDIS there? How did both of them manage to get caught by the Angels? What is the beginning of this story, from the Doctor's point of view? Memcginn 22:07, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

• We don't know. The Doctor has been known to put the TARDIS on random before. The Thirteenth Doctor 12:45, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

  That's what I thought. Someone needs to write this story, then. It could be a really, really interesting second half to the time loop, I think. Memcginn 17:28, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

  He could have been looking for the Weeping Angels in the first place, for all we know. 174.55.227.104 03:57, July 26, 2010 (UTC)
  

Or it he could very well be there to keep events in order after receiving the notes from sally, its a slight paradox but its not unheard of in Doctor who Kingtuter 14:16, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

• Maybe the Weeping Angel that originally separated the Doctor and Martha from the TARDIS was an ontological paradox too. Look carefully at the end. The notes Sally gives the Doctor contain a photo of an Angel. And of course as we find out later, an image of an Angel becomes an Angel... 86.151.0.137^{talk to me} 00:06, June 28, 2012 (UTC)

Too Many Sallys?

Under Story Notes, a previous contributor wrote that:

"Although nothing is ever said about it, it's very possible that Kathy's daughter Sally, and Billy's wife Sally, are in fact the same person."

This spectulation is not supported in the script or an independent citation from some other source. Also, Kathy's daughter would likely have been born in the 1920s or the 30s at best, making her near or over 40 when Billy arrived in 1969. Even if he left the alley and married her right away, she doesn't sound like she'd be Billy's type or the kind of girl he'd later describe to Sally on his death bed as "she was hot like you." Trhickey 22:51, February 20, 2011 (UTC)

Camaraman visible in one scene

If you watch carefully the scene just after Sally first breaks into Wester Drumlins a camara man can be seen in a reflection who rapidly moves out of shot. Its most noticable due to the reflected red light on his camara, which is what first attracted my attention to the scene.

Is the Fourth Wall Broken in This Episode?

In a few scenes there are Angels standing there doing nothing even when no-one is watching them, apart from the audience. Does this suggest the Angels won't even reveal to the audience their true forms? 87.102.117.106^{talk to me} 14:54, January 7, 2012 (UTC)

There could easily be a mouse or bird or something that could see them during them when a human character wasn't looking. 121.91.126.177^{talk to me} 09:20, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

Without the TARDIS

I'm uncertain about this line:

"The episode also marks the first time the Doctor has temporarily been trapped in a time period without the TARDIS."

This may be true in the new series but I can think straight away of 'Genesis of the Daleks' in which, if memory serves, the Doctor was in a time period without the TARDIS in the original series. I'll remove this for now but of course it can be added back later if either I'm remembering incorrectly or it's reworded to indicate it's only in the new series.110.33.161.20^{talk to me} 06:26, January 29, 2012 (UTC)

Uncredited cast

I removed the uncredited cast because they were unsourced. They can be re-added if they are properly sourced. Shambala108 ☎ 15:17, March 15, 2013 (UTC)

• Weeping Angel - Aga Blonska (uncredited)
• Weeping Angel - Elen Thomas (uncredited)