S6E5: The Rebel Flesh

Just watching the Canadian broadcast and interestingly the "Amy's Story" clip was played again, this time as the lead-in for the opening credits.

Seems kind of odd to me that there's no episode on in Canada next week. BBC America isn't showing it because apparently it's a holiday weekend in the US, but in Canada the holiday weekend now. Next weekend is just a normal weekend here. Must be some kind of agreement between Space and BBC America that the US has to show it first. Hang on, that can't be right, it's on an hour earlier here every week! Strangeness...

Interesting moral issue raised in this episode, but didn't "Surrogates" do the same thing? ... Okay, that was having people use robots to live life for them, this is creating life to be destroyed. It's a lot like people's concerns about cloning for stem cell research some time back.

WHY DO WE HAVE TO WAIT TWO WEEKS FOR THE CONCLUSION IN AMERICA???

The UK isn't doing it, right? (Checks.) Nope! UNFAIR!

Something I loved about this, RORY DIDN'T DIE OR APPEAR TO DIE THIS EPISODE! YES!

What works for me in this episode is the idea of synthetic flesh. It's all very Blade Runner to me, this question of the value of the artificial over the natural when in comes to "people." This really was a traditional episode in the sense that it raises questions like this.

Rory was good, but his behavior seems very odd to me. Why is he so concerned about Jennifer? Is it because of his time as an Auton? The scene in the bathroom made me jump.

Also you could see the cliffhanger coming a mile away, but at least it's not the Doctor hanging on the end of his brolly.

All in all, good fun and very creepy. The melty-faced Gangers are downright scary to look at.

AC Rempt wrote:

Rory was good, but his behavior seems very odd to me. Why is he so concerned about Jennifer? Is it because of his time as an Auton?

Interesting concept, but I think it's more likely because he's a nurse. Remember at the end of "The Doctor's Wife," he says he felt bad when Idris' human form "died" in his arms.

This is someone who needs help, and Rory instinctively helps people.

You would think MORE people would be home to watch it next saturday in the USA, with it being a holiday weekend and all.

jaredofmo wrote:

Interesting concept, but I think it's more likely because he's a nurse. Remember at the end of "The Doctor's Wife," he says he felt bad when Idris' human form "died" in his arms.

This is someone who needs help, and Rory instinctively helps people.

Good point. Or maybe he feels like there is finally someone who needs him, unlike Amy who tends to turn to the Doctor. Or maybe all of these!

Whoosier Whovian wrote:

You would think MORE people would be home to watch it next saturday in the USA, with it being a holiday weekend and all.

Yet another reason to give BBCA the brush off.

I am not watching Who in standard def with commercials!

Well i think i was out the room 58 minutes out of 60. At least Character Options now has new Matt Smith Ganger Figure in the works:) And its on again as im typing this so now im out of the room 86 minutes lol. Its on tomorrow at 1pm. HELP!!!!! lol

And this business skipping next week cause of the Holiday what kinda *censored* is that. I guess ill watch the 3 stooges marathon Nuk Nuk Woo Woo Woo Woo

I liked it. I was a bit worried about something new from the writer of "Fear Her," but overall I was very pleased. Not one of my favorites yet... we'll see what part two brings... but I found the basic plot interesting.

I know people are talking about it being like the Silurian episode, but it seems to be much more closely an homage to Frankenstein.

I wouldn't feel comfortable calling it more than "good" without having seen the second part, but I think the combined 2-parter has the potential to be my favorite episodes this season. It was indeed similar to the Silurian 2-parter last time (which I also liked but did not LOVE), but raised questions about who counts as a person and what makes us "real." I thought having the ganger voice a desire to see the son was especially neat -- I mean, we can imagine the groups going on to live separate lives, as the original 10th Doctor and Donna/Arm Doctor did, but how would the logistics of family work? (Conceivably the gangers would just have to abandon those relationships, but that would be a tough sacrifice. And if killing their doubles meant holding onto them, it's entirely understandable that they might decide to go that route.)

So other episodes have been "cleverer" and had better dialogue, but for me this one had the potential to be the most thought-provoking yet. I could definitely have done with more exchanges like that than running through corridors and rubber-punching, though. Sort of reminded me of Pertwee trying to negotiate that peace way back in the day, and more recently of the talks between the Silurian and human representatives.

This one's also got the potential to advance the greater arc in a big way, and possibly connect to stuff we've already seen -- the Doctor knows more about the flesh than he's said so far, so I wonder if this isn't how some species from the classic series got its start. And 'd almost bet that ganger Doctor factors into later events -- Ganger Doctor could even be the one we saw killed by the astronaut at the beginning of the series. The flesh does copy everything down to clothes, so who's to say it wouldn't be able to copy the regeneration ability as well? Jenny was able to do it, and her creation wasn't even as sophisticated.

I generally hate the speculation that stems from other episodes -- I often feel like fans end up giving the writers credit for stuff that wasn't even hinted at in the episode -- but I feel kinda justified doing it here!

It wasn't bad.

Just to keep it simple. It was okay. The first 1/3 of the show was beyond dull and it picked up on the last third. Next week (by other venues - sorry, refuse to watch it on BBCA) looks far better.

It's a really dumb move by BBC America to throw off the synched schedule. Not only do people not want to wait two weeks to see the end of this story when the UK will only have to wait one week, but they'll have to avoid spoilers to really enjoy the story, meaning either avoiding or carefully treading around their favorite Doctor Who forums online.

That's why I suspect many will go back to "other means" to watch Doctor Who next week. While some hate BBCA's commercials, you'll find that more fans just want to be able to see the next part of the story about the same time as the rest of the world.

I thought these "other means" were why they were synchronizing the airdates.

Whoosier Whovian wrote:

You would think MORE people would be home to watch it next saturday in the USA, with it being a holiday weekend and all.

I read an announcement about it, and the article stated the rationale was that many US stations do not like to schedule new shows to air during the Memorial Day weekend because it is a travel holiday with a large amount of people not being 'home' during that time.


I myself am only making a day trip on Friday, but even if I was gone for the whole weekend, there are these things called VCRs, DVRs, etc...

A travel holiday with gas at $4 a gallon? Yeah, right. Show a whole season of new shows because I'll be home rolling pennies.

And I know "other sources" are controversial, but I only do it for Who, and I wouldn't if they didn't pull crap like skipping a week between a cliffhanger.

And it was in high def.


And there were no commercials.

im be vacationing in Yardville (back Deck) BBC America is Running a Who-thon different from PBS they do not ask for a dime!!!!! Besides i am stock piling my gold for the 3 Dr Lego Sets and a few mystery packs


What they should do is go Retro and get some of the older Doctors and make it a holiday Treat.

So chime in if you think they * borrowed the Concept of Avatars from James Cameron except not blue and from a vat of Yogurt* oh I liked Avatar just as much as this episode lol

As a UK forum member, I tend to get my fix of the excelent US TV via the Web.

Can my fellow US forum members answer why US TV takes so many breaks during their seasons? I know the Fall season usually starts late Aug/early Sept & takes a braek at Thanksgiving & Xmas/New Year. But after Jan, shows tend to be on for a week or 2 & then take a week off...back on & then back off again.......etc

Do these breaks not drive you up the wall?

workstinx wrote:

As a UK forum member, I tend to get my fix of the excelent US TV via the Web.

Can my fellow US forum members answer why US TV takes so many breaks during their seasons? I know the Fall season usually starts late Aug/early Sept & takes a braek at Thanksgiving & Xmas/New Year. But after Jan, shows tend to be on for a week or 2 & then take a week off...back on & then back off again.......etc

Do these breaks not drive you up the wall?

The only shows that do that (excessively) are the ones with the longer seasons that are on the basic, non-cable television networks. Although I don't want any of them, yes they are annoying. The shows usually (well, there's exceptions, but for the most part) run straight through from their premiere for about 8 to 10 weeks. Then take a break near the end of the year that lasts about 3 weeks or so. When they return, the last 12 or so episodes are spread out over the next four to four and a half months, meaning about 6 or 7 weeks in between with repeated episodes. It's just become the standard. Everyone complains about it, but they've set it up this way, keeping the shows on for the majority of the year....I'm sure even those who DO watch them find it annoying

kcooper76 wrote:

workstinx wrote:

As a UK forum member, I tend to get my fix of the excelent US TV via the Web.

Can my fellow US forum members answer why US TV takes so many breaks during their seasons? I know the Fall season usually starts late Aug/early Sept & takes a braek at Thanksgiving & Xmas/New Year. But after Jan, shows tend to be on for a week or 2 & then take a week off...back on & then back off again.......etc

Do these breaks not drive you up the wall?

The only shows that do that (excessively) are the ones with the longer seasons that are on the basic, non-cable television networks. Although I don't want any of them, yes they are annoying. The shows usually (well, there's exceptions, but for the most part) run straight through from their premiere for about 8 to 10 weeks. Then take a break near the end of the air that lasts about 3 weeks or so. When they return, the last 12 or so episodes are spread out over the next four to four and a half months, meaning about 6 or 7 weeks in between with repeated episodes.

It was the CSI's & House etc that I was thinking about...noticed Dexter & some others run straight through. Also find that US TV cancells quite alot of their shows if ratings are poor. Quite liked shows like No Ordinary Family & V...will miss them. Will miss Chuck when it ends next year.

The Shows on USA TNT TBS HBO Showtime all do it

they probably make more in the DVD sales

If your loyal to the show then you stick with it, so they are really taking a chance breaking. But shows have the fan base. I think Doctor Who is doing it cause i have noticed they seem to be tied into NBC Universal some how. And the decision probably came down from the Network.

Does anyone in the in the UK know if dr whos production is tied to Universal? Example the Actress who was martha Freema is now on Law and order Uk. Ok back to the Simpsons!

workstinx wrote:

kcooper76 wrote:

workstinx wrote:

As a UK forum member, I tend to get my fix of the excelent US TV via the Web.

Can my fellow US forum members answer why US TV takes so many breaks during their seasons? I know the Fall season usually starts late Aug/early Sept & takes a braek at Thanksgiving & Xmas/New Year. But after Jan, shows tend to be on for a week or 2 & then take a week off...back on & then back off again.......etc

Do these breaks not drive you up the wall?

The only shows that do that (excessively) are the ones with the longer seasons that are on the basic, non-cable television networks. Although I don't want any of them, yes they are annoying. The shows usually (well, there's exceptions, but for the most part) run straight through from their premiere for about 8 to 10 weeks. Then take a break near the end of the air that lasts about 3 weeks or so. When they return, the last 12 or so episodes are spread out over the next four to four and a half months, meaning about 6 or 7 weeks in between with repeated episodes.

It was the CSI's & House etc that I was thinking about...noticed Dexter & some others run straight through. Also find that US TV cancells quite alot of their shows if ratings are poor. Quite liked shows like No Ordinary Family & V...will miss them. Will miss Chuck when it ends next year.

Right, you'll notice those shows that run straight through also have shorter seasons, overall. They're usually on here on the cable networks, without advertising. And it is surprising just how many shows are cancelled on the regular networks each year. Networks cancel about half of their shows each year and pick up many new ones (that are also most likely destined to fail.....Well, I guess I'm being a bit negative, but I really don't like many of them at all)

kcooper76 wrote:

workstinx wrote:

kcooper76 wrote:

workstinx wrote:

As a UK forum member, I tend to get my fix of the excelent US TV via the Web.

Can my fellow US forum members answer why US TV takes so many breaks during their seasons? I know the Fall season usually starts late Aug/early Sept & takes a braek at Thanksgiving & Xmas/New Year. But after Jan, shows tend to be on for a week or 2 & then take a week off...back on & then back off again.......etc

Do these breaks not drive you up the wall?

The only shows that do that (excessively) are the ones with the longer seasons that are on the basic, non-cable television networks. Although I don't want any of them, yes they are annoying. The shows usually (well, there's exceptions, but for the most part) run straight through from their premiere for about 8 to 10 weeks. Then take a break near the end of the air that lasts about 3 weeks or so. When they return, the last 12 or so episodes are spread out over the next four to four and a half months, meaning about 6 or 7 weeks in between with repeated episodes.

It was the CSI's & House etc that I was thinking about...noticed Dexter & some others run straight through. Also find that US TV cancells quite alot of their shows if ratings are poor. Quite liked shows like No Ordinary Family & V...will miss them. Will miss Chuck when it ends next year.

Right, you'll notice those shows that run straight through also have shorter seasons, overall. They're usually on here on the cable networks, without advertising. And it is surprising just how many shows are cancelled on the regular networks each year. Networks cancel about half of their shows each year and pick up many new ones (that are also most likely destined to fail.....Well, I guess I'm being a bit negative, but I really don't like many of them at all)

We all have our own likes & dislikes...it's what makes us who we are!

I just find the way US TV is run to be absolutely fascinating...so many breaks in scheduling & SO many commercial breaks too! I feel sorry for the viewers who like the shows & who tune in regularly'''only to find out that their shows have either been moved to another night or cancelled.

Hardly any UK TV shows have teasers for the following weeks' episodes & they hardly ever let you know what's coming up after the commercials or recap after them.

workstinx wrote:

We all have our own likes & dislikes...it's what makes us who we are!

I just find the way US TV is run to be absolutely fascinating...so many breaks in scheduling & SO many commercial breaks too! I feel sorry for the viewers who like the shows & who tune in regularly'''only to find out that their shows have either been moved to another night or cancelled.

Hardly any UK TV shows have teasers for the following weeks' episodes & they hardly ever let you know what's coming up after the commercials or recap after them.

I feel as if the advertising is what ruins it for me entirely. It's completely dissatisfying to me when 1/3 of the program is advertising that is most often nothing that I'm interested in. And here, nothing's really moved to a different time & night mid-season, only rarely. Again, it's with the ratings. Nothing popular will be shown on Friday nights because those are known to have the worst ratings. Switching times means the same. If one time is more favorable than another, the most popular show will always take that timeslot.

Wow, I didn't realize this was the thread for "The Rebel Flesh" that we were discussing this in.

kcooper76 wrote:

workstinx wrote:

We all have our own likes & dislikes...it's what makes us who we are!

I just find the way US TV is run to be absolutely fascinating...so many breaks in scheduling & SO many commercial breaks too! I feel sorry for the viewers who like the shows & who tune in regularly'''only to find out that their shows have either been moved to another night or cancelled.

Hardly any UK TV shows have teasers for the following weeks' episodes & they hardly ever let you know what's coming up after the commercials or recap after them.

I feel as if the advertising is what ruins it for me entirely. It's completely dissatisfying to me when 1/3 of the program is advertising that is most often nothing that I'm interested in. And here, nothing's really moved to a different time & night mid-season, only rarely. Again, it's with the ratings. Nothing popular will be shown on Friday nights because those are known to have the worst ratings. Switching times means the same. If one time is more favorable than another, the most popular show will always take that timeslot.

Wow, I didn't realize this was the thread for "The Rebel Flesh" that we were discussing this in.

That would be my fault.....SORRY!

This is taking our minds off the episode more endless Banter !!!!!!!!