Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Owlbread]

Jerry and Tweety. I longed to see them crunched and crushed in the jaws of the famous cats.

[Playergamer]

Neo, I'd like to point out just how short a time Angels have existed. Realistically, if it's the same writer who came up with them, and it's only been a short time since their first appearance, it's not certain they weren't originally meant to be like that.

Also, woo Cybermen!

[Neonivek]

The doctor already explained their purpose and while their second appearance could be considered a slight... their appearances afterwards became nonsense reasons just to keep them in the series to the extent that everything you could have liked about them in their first appearances has been completely lost.

Sure they only had like... 4 appearances... It took only 4 to do it.

But I'll put it to you this way

If the Weeping Angels appeared only once (or maybe twice) and then never showed up again. They would be much more fondly remembered and people would be begging for them to pop up again.

Now? People would beg for them not to appear in an episode.

[sal880612m]

I think they just overdid it with one doctor and one set of companions. I can think of three Weeping Angel storylines and two of them were with Amy, Rory, and Eleven.

[Playergamer]

Neo, here's the thing: If Moffat strictly, to the letter, followed Blink, then we'd have a now-pretty boring monster to deal with. But, if he says "You don't know anything about this guys" and shows us a whole new type of angel, that's exciting. Sure, it might not be the best narrative thanks to that, but won't you always remember that moment when you first saw a plunger, and had no clue what it did?

Why so much hate for Time, Flesh, and Manhattan, anyway? They weren't bad episodes. Maybe not the best, but still decent.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

At the end of Manhattan, though...

What a tweest!

[Duuvian]

Roadrunner from looney tunes. Always found it annoying.

Roadrunner was a good guy. I agree though, I always felt bad for the Coyote even though I knew if he succeeded the Roadrunner would perish.

Jerry and Tweety. I longed to see them crunched and crushed in the jaws of the famous cats.

I liked Jerry most of the time. One exception is one of the Three Mouseketeers cartoons. Tom is the King's guard and the King threatens to behead him if his sleep is disturbed. I can't remember what Jerry and his lil punk Scrappy of a sidekick was doing, but towards the end he purposefully wakes the King up so he can achieve his ends. The cartoon ends with a Guillotine descending presumably on Tom with the lil bastard sidekick saying something in French, I think Cest le vie or some such.

Tweety though I would have liked to see caught by Sylvester as you say.

[Neonivek]

Neo, here's the thing: If Moffat strictly, to the letter, followed Blink, then we'd have a now-pretty boring monster to deal with.

We would have a benevolent and near unstoppable villain who needs to be outsmarted rather then outfought or outpaced? One who isn't completely evil and thus their destruction is out of the question.

Why so much hate for Time, Flesh, and Manhattan, anyway? They weren't bad episodes. Maybe not the best, but still decent

Because it takes a really great villain. One that left a lot of impact... and slowly but surely takes away everything you liked about them. Their morality? Gone... Their creepy powers? Gone...

If Blink featured the later versions of the Weeping Angels it would have been a terrible episode.

[Playergamer]

You know, I actually typed up a counter-argument, but I realized nothing I could say would change your mind, and vice-versa. So, since I don't want to start a war, bye guys.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Nobody wins on the Internet.

[Neonivek]

It is because the statue isn't REALLY them, it is sort of a representation. Later on they reveal that they possess statues (in one of the more silly moments of the weeping angels).

You know, I actually typed up a counter-argument, but I realized nothing I could say would change your mind, and vice-versa. So, since I don't want to start a war, bye guys.

Honestly I liked our conversation. I didn't really think we were going to start a war. Especially since I don't think either of us are that passionate about the Weeping Angels (especially given the Finale)

[Playergamer]

If two angels see each other, they are both frozen.

[Playergamer]

They can still see when quantum-locked, but they can't move.

Explanation: The angels do not cease to exist, but just become stone.

((Fun fact: Weeping angels feed on electrical energy, too, not just time energy. That's why the lights flicker.))

[Neonivek]

So, angels turn to stone, but they also cease to exist?
 
So, either someone has it wrong, or Moffat himself has no clue how Angels work.

It is hard to explain but the way I see it... The Stone form of the Angels is more like an impression.

UNFORTUNATELY how it works later is that Angels possess statues and can move as the statue unless they are being observed in which case they hop to another dimension and their stone body is all that is left... unless they are not being observed in which case they hop back to their bodies.

[Neonivek]

Sounds like Moffat just did a few asspulls to get them to fit the story...

Moffat is a good one off writer. Not a series writer

Honestly I am picking on the Weeping Angels but just about any of the best Moffat monsters has degraded. (Such as "The Silence")

[Yoink]

Y'know, the whole premise of this thread is kinda flawed... I mean, even if you spoiler info about a particular work of fiction, if you have the name of the work on the spoiler that tells the uninitiated that it has some sort of annoying recurring villain.

Anyway, mine's Judge Dredd. That prick.

[10ebbor10]

Anyway, the easiest explanation (which is shown in the series, IIRC), is that the stone isn't just ordinary stone. It's practically unbreakable.