S7E4: The Power of Three (SPOILERS)

All character and no plot. But I suppose you need to care about these characters so they devoted an episode to caring about them. And then to keep the budget down they added small black boxes and an "ancient myth from Gallifrey" as an excuse for the episode to take place. I think this was all about making sure the audience knows the Ponds are ready to go and to introduce Kate Stewart. Both important but simply included in a rather average (or just tad below average) episode. Not one I imagine I'll pop into the DVD player in years to come just to watch, but one that I'll re-watch if watching the entire Series 7 again.

I was thinking that UNIT needed a real figurehead and recurring character if the producers wanted to make UNIT meaningful. Haven’t seen Col. Mace or Bambera or Magambo in quite a while. It becomes a bit suspicious that they cannot hold on to personnel from episode to episode much like fans often forget that The Seeds of Doom is one of the final UNIT stories because none of the UNIT regulars appear. If we get Kate Stewart as the new leader of UNIT then that’s fine with me. Maybe next time she’ll even have something to do.

I expected more. Kate was little more than a walk-om/walk-off (a waste of talent). I liked the premise, but after so much build up expecting something interesting, I felt really let down. Worse, my nieces were both less than impressed, the little one saying, "that's it?" at the end.

I liked this more the the rest of the season until the lame ending. The Zygons under the Savoy got a huge laugh out of me.

It was okay (the last 10 minutes of the show ruined it basically). At least this season there is more balance with the Doctor and Amy / Rory and the stories are self-contained though the 41-46 minute length doesn't allow for the story to breathe as classic Who did. That's been my biggest rant the last two seasons - too much focus on Amy. Nice nod to Kate's daddy and hope to see her and UNIT again.

What I do notice is that many of the guests that appear on the show wind of with better roles on the Big Finish audios. Here, many times they are used as cameos with minimal impact.

Where was Brian Cox??

Also...how is UNIT aware of The Doctor? Hasn't the world forgot about him (I still don't understand The Wedding Of River Song)?

I'm very tired of saying goodbye to the Ponds. Their exit is more drawn out than David Tenant's.

Brian Cox was in one of the news interviews, but unfortunately he wasn't the Brit character actor.
"The Wedding of River Song" didn't erase the world's knowledge of the Doctor.Everything in that episode was an alternate reality that went away after the Doctor got River to put the timeline back on the right track by shooting the Tesselector decoy of himself. Only the Silence & Canton were tricked into thinking the Doctor died. (The logistics of pulling a cacklebladder with a time travel must be frustrating to both sides. "What are you doing here? Didn't we kill you already?" "No, that won't be until ... wait, when do you kill me?" "Oops! Forget we said anything.") The world didn't forget about him. It's not yet revealed why he's not in Solomon's database yet the ISA folks trust him.
Kate figured out he was the Doctor by deduction & her portable scanner.

"History" considers the Doctor dead so the Silence are happy. His timeline is over and he cannot go on to speak his true name or answer the question.

But not sure if the other writers are getting it "correct". Wiped from the Daleks, missing from Solomon's database of all space and time, still friendly with UNIT knowing about Artron Energy, trusted by the ISA to help. The Doctor is MIA except when it's convenient for him to still be known.

I thought this was an OK episode (not bad, and you know my history by now). This was supposed to be the big, emotional, heart wrenching episode for the Ponds, and I'm surprised to see that I'm not the only one that the episode fell flat on.

First off, Let me just say, I like Rory's Dad more than Amy or Rory, and was I the only one hoping that he would want to go with the Doctor, and the Ponds stay on Earth?

B: The whole invasion was filler for the Ponds centric episode. As far as someone else comparing it to the 9th/10th Doctor Era invasions, that's what I was thinking the whole time, however, which was better is a matter of opinion.

Kate Stewart. What a mixed bag. I wanted to like her, but I just didn't. I don't know if it was the Actress they chose, or how they presented her character. She was very un-Brigadier like. I would have chosen the Actress they had as Captain Jack's daughter in Torchwood (very tough), or made her more like Captain Erisa Magambo who had two spots in Doctor Who, and I thought the character was good enough to bring back for more. Kate, I could go without seeing again (and yes, I know she will be back).

My girlfriend doesn't really like the new episodes, much like myself, and asked what I would do at this point. So I'll tell you my answer: I'd turn Amy into a CyberWoman, have the Doctor force Rory to deactivate her, which would kill her, which would leave Rory a crying wreck.

This is the discussion we had during this emotional, heart warming story. The Ponds have been crammed down our throats for the last 2 and a half years, and as much as Moffat wants them to be the greatest companions of all time, I feel that there is still half of fandom that does not agree with him. Rory's Dad has only been in two episodes, yet, I would be more upset if he died.

bret_owen99 wrote:

This is the discussion we had during this emotional, heart warming story. The Ponds have been crammed down our throats for the last 2 and a half years, and as much as Moffat wants them to be the greatest companions of all time, I feel that there is still half of fandom that does not agree with him. Rory's Dad has only been in two episodes, yet, I would be more upset if he died.

This has been exactly my problem with the Moffat era. Amy was the center of the universe on this show since she came on board. I preferred Rory but he always took the back seat to Amy and the idiotic killing of his character every other episode was a joke last year (wouldn't mind seeing some adventures of him during his 2,000 years guarding the cube).

As for Brian, he's an instant hit and it's a shame he was introed so late (I can't see him coming back after the Pond's departure / demise (whatever). Hopefully, with the new companion there will be a better balance and she won't be the main focus like Amy was.

Fans are really fond of Brian & Wilf when they're used sparingly, but would we find them grating too if they became full-time companions?

Evil Monkey Pope wrote:

Fans are really fond of Brian & Wilf when they're used sparingly, but would we find them grating too if they became full-time companions?

I would say yes. It's highly offensive to develop supporting characters on this show. Almost as offensive as long story arcs. If they're full-time, they should be kept dumbed-down and reminded how unimportant they are.

Eh, it was ok for what it was. Introducing the dilemma of the Ponds, having them make a choice. Also, solidifying the Doctor's affection for the Ponds. That way, it will be even MORE of a heart break when they leave.

kcooper76 wrote:

Evil Monkey Pope wrote:

Fans are really fond of Brian & Wilf when they're used sparingly, but would we find them grating too if they became full-time companions?

I would say yes. It's highly offensive to develop supporting characters on this show. Almost as offensive as long story arcs. If they're full-time, they should be kept dumbed-down and reminded how unimportant they are.

Personally, I wouldn't mind full time Elders joining the Doctor. However, as all personal opinions are personal, Story Arcs and Companions are viewed by different fans in different ways, be them Classic, or of the New Series.

Just like Scientology attacks anyone who speaks ill of them, I find some people in a 'Cult of Moffat' insist on replying like their opinion is Law, when throughout the history of the show writers have been critisized, companions have been demonized, and Doctors have been debated as good or not.

We're just confused as to why it was fine when RTD made companions more integral to the show but when Moffat continues this tradition it's suddenly the worst thing to happen to the programme.

Evil Monkey Pope wrote:

We're just confused as to why it was fine when RTD made companions more integral to the show but when Moffat continues this tradition it's suddenly the worst thing to happen to the programme.

Basically,

whoops. extra post.

Evil Monkey Pope wrote:

We're just confused as to why it was fine when RTD made companions more integral to the show but when Moffat continues this tradition it's suddenly the worst thing to happen to the programme.

Precisely. A lot of the same criticisms that many Moffat haters love to throw out there can be leveled at RTD too. It's a matter of selective memory and rationalizing to fit their bias.

Cruel Angel wrote:

Evil Monkey Pope wrote:

We're just confused as to why it was fine when RTD made companions more integral to the show but when Moffat continues this tradition it's suddenly the worst thing to happen to the programme.

Precisely. A lot of the same criticisms that many Moffat haters love to throw out there can be leveled at RTD too. It's a matter of selective memory and rationalizing to fit their bias.

Agreed.... I've never seen so much dislike for basic character development as I've seen here.

I enjoyed it a lot actually. It had a good story, a reasonably mysterious mystery and a lot of little continuity nods like The Tower of London being UNIT's base. The Cameos were a nice touch, and when the Doctor revealed that Kate Stewart was the Brigadier's Daughter, I had an inner geekgsm (I was with people - it would've been awkward). I do hope we'll see her again soon.

But sadly, I feel that it suffers from the same problem as "Night Terrors". There was too much spent on the build up, and not enough with the resolution. I'd give it a 4/5.

Well, since they have had paid to have every Dalek ever on a set they had to build, and bulit half a tricerotops to ride on a ship and had to travel out of the country to film a cyborg episode......and they go to NY next week and fight angels, which had to be shipped to NY for filming! They probably needed a cheaper filler episode that was relatively inexpensive so as not to totally blow budget, so for that, I will forgive them!

Evil Monkey Pope wrote:

We're just confused as to why it was fine when RTD made companions more integral to the show but when Moffat continues this tradition it's suddenly the worst thing to happen to the programme.

First off, RTD is critisized all the time for his companions. Let me see....

Rose is the most hated companion from the RTD era, for so many reasons.

Martha is always called a waste because she was a lovelorn girl who didn't really add any character on the show (but was much better on Torchwood).

Donna, as far as I can tell, is actually the one companion most people agree on that RTD did right, because, basically, she was like 'classic' series companions. She wasn't a love interest, or infatuated with the Doctor. She was a friend, much in the vein Sarah Jane, Tegan, or others were. She was there to help, but not steal the spotlight or obsess over the Doctor.


As far as the term 'making companions more integral to the show', he's created the Doctor's Wife, his Mother and Father in-laws, and has basically said he is going to name the Doctor(Doctor Who???). If you think Moffat haters are only mad at Moffat for his choice of companions, I think that is a small chunk of the complaints.


As far as why I liked Brian more than Rory or Amy, he was a pretty good companion this episode. He did what the Doctor asked him to do, he wasn't thinking of himself, or what his life decisions were going to be. BTW, since I'm on the subject, I was disgusted at the thought of Amy and Rory agreeing to give up the doctor and adventuring for 'normal life'. When Sarah Jane Smith was left behind by the Doctor, she spent the next 25-30 years of her life trying to find adventure here on Earth. She didn't just say 'Oh well, back to being a reporter, I like real life better'. Amy and Rory lost all my respect at that moment, as there are lines of people who would be the Doctor's companions and would never think they way they thought.

I actually read an article not too long ago that said that Amy Pond was sexist, while I don't agree, it was a good read. Amy Pond got married, had a baby, likes to make a pouty face, and has a really good memory. This writer unfavorably compared her with RTD's companions, saying that Amy was just a combination of all the things the writer's know about women, and it was a pretty compelling argument, I must say.

In closing, I'm just tired of people speaking like they are the whole of fandom. Opinions are different, but I'm tired of the people who think you can't be a 'real fan' if you don't like Moffat. Or you must not like the Classic Series, because that's what his writiing is like (I watched most of the Classic Series, and I cannot disagree more). RTD, Moffat, JNT, Adams, etc, all have their fans and haters. To say which side is right or wrong is a matter of opinion, not fact.

Code:

In closing, I'm just tired of people speaking like they are the whole of fandom. Opinions are different, but I'm tired of the people who think you can't be a 'real fan' if you don't like Moffat. Or you must not like the Classic Series, because that's what his writiing is like (I watched most of the Classic Series, and I cannot disagree more). RTD, Moffat, JNT, Adams, etc, all have their fans and haters. To say which side is right or wrong is a matter of opinion, not fact.

I love all this 'real fan' debate. Excuse me, who is to say who is a real fan or not? I TOTALLY agree with you on that point. RTD and Moffat both have their apologists and their haters. No one's right, no one's wrong. Just how you see things.

bret_owen99 wrote:

BTW, since I'm on the subject, I was disgusted at the thought of Amy and Rory agreeing to give up the doctor and adventuring for 'normal life'. When Sarah Jane Smith was left behind by the Doctor, she spent the next 25-30 years of her life trying to find adventure here on Earth. She didn't just say 'Oh well, back to being a reporter, I like real life better'. Amy and Rory lost all my respect at that moment, as there are lines of people who would be the Doctor's companions and would never think they way they thought.

I find this really interesting. I actually lost a lot of respect for them when they decided to stay his companions and not live regular lives. This season they'd been building on the idea that the Ponds have their own separate life together, growing more distant from the 'Doctor' life. Then this episode we get a closer look at their outside life, and see that they are becoming increasingly fond of it. I loved the idea that they could come to appreciate 'regular' life more than companion life, finding it so much more 'human' in this episode... and to me, that's what would have been best. I would have much preferred them deciding that the life they could build together means more, that it could be every bit as exciting. In my opinion, they made the wrong decision in the end. If their story ends in their deaths, it's their own fault for choosing this life. In this case (and most cases, really), life without the Doctor is better.

bret_owen99 wrote:

As far as the term 'making companions more integral to the show', he's created the Doctor's Wife, his Mother and Father in-laws, and has basically said he is going to name the Doctor(Doctor Who???). If you think Moffat haters are only mad at Moffat for his choice of companions, I think that is a small chunk of the complaints.

I don't disagree with everything you've said, but I have to ask:

What's Moffat Haters opinions on the Cartmel Master Plan?

Rust wrote:

bret_owen99 wrote:

As far as the term 'making companions more integral to the show', he's created the Doctor's Wife, his Mother and Father in-laws, and has basically said he is going to name the Doctor(Doctor Who???). If you think Moffat haters are only mad at Moffat for his choice of companions, I think that is a small chunk of the complaints.

I don't disagree with everything you've said, but I have to ask:

What's Moffat Haters opinions on the Cartmel Master Plan?

Good question! I loved Cartmel (the TV stories during the 7th Doctor's Era). Was I disapointed the show was canceled at that time, and it was never allowed to play out? yes. Was it for the best? Maybe.

I know there are novels and audios that continue the story, however, if you go by what was shown on TV, there was still mystery to the story and character.

Personally, and I say this as my opinion only, I see no parallels between Moffat and Cartmel, or any of the other brilliant writer's of the 'Classic' Era. The Key to Time was a brilliant story arc, and I would watch it over and over. The same can be said for The Trial of a Time Lord.

Series 6 was a travesty I will never watch again. I don't want to recall it (much like Colin Baker's first season). These are my tastes, and I know there are other's out there with different tastes who will rewatch it with quite the opposite view.

Series 5 was ok, had more memorable episodes that this current Series, or 6, and the Arc wasn't that bad IMHO. The Problem I'm having during the "Moffat Era" is the Identitiy Crisis the show is having.

Series 5 was a Story Arc, Individual Episodes, with some new characters, but overall, it was enjoyable. Series 6 was the Saga of River Song/Amy Pond (Let's not kid ourselves by saying it was anything otherwise). It created the Silence, who are now being regarded as the greatest Who villain of all time by some fans (couldn't disagree more). River Song's 'mystery' was dissolved. Amy Pond became even more important than she had in Series 5 (which was hard to believe). It was just something I couldn't relate to on any possible level as a fan of the show for the last 25 years.

Series 7 has no Story Arc (yet, and yes, I know there have been hints, it just hasn't been revealed yet), each story seems to be a stand alone story (almost crammed into an episode, instead of having two parters). Each Title had the title of a movie, movie posters were created, and from what I can tell, This Series is kind of falling flat on some fans. I'm not saying it's bad (not Series 6 bad to me), but it just isn't as exciting as I think they thought it would be. Who would think that with a title "Dinosaurs on a Spaceship", fans would say, "eh, it's a forgettable episode".

Back to topic, and why we are all here, The Power of Three was supposed to be this big emotional Ponds episode before you know what happens, and from the survey on here, I was surprised to see that I wasn't the only one that the episode didn't really impress. The fact that this episode didn't go over well with people other than myself, who I admit is critical at this point, shows that there is some sort of direction problem with the show.

The Invasion could have been handled better, the Ponds making their decision could have been handled better. These are all the posts I hear, and yet, it's like people say "It's ok Moffat to make a subpar episode", when RTD left, all I heard was "Thank goodness he's gone! No more subpar shows!" The Showrunner needs to be held accountable if the show isn't going as well as it should be, be it RTD or Moffat. He doesn't get a pass just because people enjoyed Series 6, or the Christmas Episodes.

Now, I know we are only halfway through Series 7, but I want to put this hypothetical question to you. If the second half of Series 7 turns out to be as unimpressive as the first half has been, do you still feel that nothing is wrong with the show?