Inside Television with Alan Sepinwall

Review: 'Doctor Who' - 'The Angels Take Manhattan': You only die twice

The Doctor, Amy and Rory run into Steven Moffat's favorite villains

By Alan Sepinwall Saturday, Sep 29, 2012 10:00 PM

Rory (Arthur Darvill) and Amy (Karen Gillan) in their "Doctor Who" farewell.

Credit: BBC

Are you a fan of Doctor Who?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

"Doctor Who" has just concluded its five episode fall mini-season (next up: the Christmas special), and I have a review coming up just as soon as I specifically remember not noticing the lines on your eyes...

"I always rip out the last page of a book. Then it doesn't have to end. I hate endings." -The Doctor

For most of these five episodes, I've been much more interested in the Doctor's relationship with Amy and Rory (and, in the premiere, with Oswin) than with the various monsters they've had to fight. That pattern unfortunately held true with "The Angels Take Manhattan," in which Steven Moffat went to the Weeping Angels well once too often, but which was carried by the interactions between the complicated Pond family unit and the Doctor.

I got a kick out of the Statue of Liberty itself being an Angel (though I'm not sure how it avoids being seen by anyone else, even at the lower tip of Manhattan in the '30s), and also appreciated the return of the time-displacement powers that didn't factor into the Angels' most recent appearance. But there are only so many variations on lights flickering on and off, people foolishly turning their heads for a moment, etc., before the incredible creepiness the Angels had back in "Blink" begins to seem like just a mundane parlor trick.

But the rest of the episode — Amy and Rory's continued attempts to stay together, the Doctor's fear of losing them, River inserting herself into all of this, the book becoming a useful guide (but only to a point), etc. — was terrific, providing all the actors some great material in Karen Gillan and Arthur Darvill's swan song. I'm always going to be troubled by the idea that Rory and Amy had decided to retire from companion-hood and randomly changed their minds at the end of last week's episode, but if we ignore the events of "The Power of Three" and just look at it as the unfortunate but non-tragic (they both lived into their 80s) end of Rory and Amy's time in the TARDIS, then it worked. (Though how will Brian react if/when the Doctor tells him the news?)

Now we're going to deal with another "The Doctor can never travel alone" story, which raises the question of why River isn't willing to at least hang out with her husband until a new companion turns up. But Matt Smith and Alex Kingston were terrific tonight as well.

What did everybody else think? If the Ponds had to go, was this a fitting ending for them? Are you annoyed that Moffat seemingly cut off any possibility of the Doctor seeing them again? Do the Angels still freak you out?

Alan Sepinwall
Sr. Editor, What's Alan Watching

Alan Sepinwall has been reviewing television since the mid-'90s, first for Tony Soprano's hometown paper, The Star-Ledger, and now for HitFix. His new book, "The Revolution Was Televised," about the last 15 years of TV drama, is for sale at Amazon. He can be reached at sepinwall@hitfix.com

Related Searches: Doctor Who, Steven Moffat, Matt Smith, Karen Gillan, Arthur Darvill

Next 97 Comments

Brendan

It's too bad he closed them off so completely, but it was probably the only way to go. When you have a time-traveling main character, there's always going to be the desire to unwrite conclusions and undermine the drama. Someone (maybe even Moffat himself) would probably have drudged those two back into the Tardis eventually, so this works as a neat conclusion.

I thought the episode (and season) were stronger than you said, Alan, but then I am a sucker for evil small things, so the giggling cherubs hit my creep center pretty dead on.
September 29, 2012 at 10:08PM EST Reply to Comment
- Swearin I know, right? There's a reason giggling, phantom children sounds are used so much in scary movies and shows, it's because it works.
  September 30, 2012 at 2:00AM EST
- fbihop That he gave no opening for the Doctor to see them was what made it so powerful. Same with Rose and Tennant's Doctor -- and even without the Russell T Davies cheat that he put in at the end.
  September 30, 2012 at 3:44AM EST
- Isaac Agreed.
  September 30, 2012 at 4:17AM EST
- Jamie keep in mind, time is frequently rewritten on this show. the doctor has destroyed the entire dalek race on multiple occasions and they keep popping up. the writers may come up with an excuse for amy and rory to come back.
  September 30, 2012 at 4:21PM EST
- Joseph I'm kind of a Dr Who noob, but why can't the doctor visit them? I think I understand why he can't time travel to NY anymore, but...couldn't he just travel to Jersey and make the drive across the river?
  October 2, 2012 at 1:42PM EST
- Brendan Joseph- I think the idea is that if he interferes in their lives again, he may alter their future, creating another paradox and ripping reality apart. They HAVE to die at the ages/place shown in the tombstone.
  October 2, 2012 at 4:30PM EST
rugman11

I'll admit, I was in tears at the end. There were some issues, but I think what really got me is that I watched the first four seasons of Doctor Who in about six weeks, so any time a companion left, I had only been watching them for a week or two. Here, I had been following Amy & Rory (and the Doctor obviously) for two and a half years and, even knowing what would happen, it still hurt.

I also wonder if Rory's middle name (Arthur) was a nod to Mark Williams's last prominent role.
September 29, 2012 at 10:15PM EST Reply to Comment
- Jason I assume it's a reference to the actor who plays him.
  September 29, 2012 at 10:24PM EST
- Erin Perhaps more likely a nod to the actor playing Rory, Arthur Darvill?
  September 29, 2012 at 10:28PM EST
- rugman11 Gah. I didn't even think of that.
  September 29, 2012 at 10:43PM EST
debbie

Re you question about why River wont travel with the Doctor long term.....
Tho its never been spelled out, I've always assumed River couldnt be absent from her own time line for too long without some kind of timey wimey thing happening. She doesnt belong in the Doctors timeline, nor he in hers...

I havent liked the structure of this season...each episode was TOO standaloney with no call backs to the past. The time jump that put the Ponds with the Doctor for ten years came at the expense of character development most indicated by the jarring divorce situation in the first episode.
But....I loved the Ponds, especially Rory, and since it looks like they lived happily ever after, Im satisfied.

Looking forward to a new companion and new stories.
September 29, 2012 at 10:15PM EST Reply to Comment
- Liz But what's River's timeline? Since conception she's been a child of the Tardis itself and her time "line" is as wibbly as they get. Plus, the Dr can always just drop her off a minute after they depart.
  September 30, 2012 at 5:09PM EST
- Zanzor49 As we have seen in past episodes, River appears in the Doctor's timeline at various stages of their relationship. Could she still be "ahead" of the Doctor at this point and knows that something will come up that will separate them?
  October 1, 2012 at 9:48AM EST
- Tracey Yeah, I was thinking that River knows that she's going to see her parents again, together in the past, which is why she is so eager for Amy to surrender to the angel, and why she is so sure it will work.
  October 1, 2012 at 9:01PM EST
debbie

Also, River is now a Professor which brings her one step closer to her death.....
September 29, 2012 at 10:18PM EST Reply to Comment
David

I would have rather the last two episodes been swapped and the Angels episode ended happily, and then Amy and Rory decided it was time to remain in their normal lives. I found myself not as impacted this way.
September 29, 2012 at 10:19PM EST Reply to Comment
- Erin I was thinking the kind of the same thing at the end of the last episode -- that I wished Amy and Rory's tenure on the show had ended with their decision to leave the Doctor and return to normal life -- but having seen this episode, I don't really care anymore. I mean, yeah, that would have been a satisfying end that worked for the characters and the narrative -- but I'm so emotionally wrecked by this episode that I'm just glad we had it. Also, it was a good reminder of the price companions pay for traveling with the Doctor. And I never get tired of seeing how devoted Amy and Rory are to each other.
  September 29, 2012 at 10:36PM EST
- lazy iggy I agree...that was the ending I was hoping for...and in my fantasy Amy finally chose a careerand became an author of children's books featuring the raggedy doctor...*sigh*
  September 29, 2012 at 10:44PM EST
- odessasteps Well, if Amy wrote the pulp novel, what's to say she didn't keep writing books? They did have 50 or so years in that room.
  September 30, 2012 at 8:22AM EST
- osofine @odessasteps, Amy didn't write the pulp novel, River did. River only said that would send it to Amy to be published (though how she knew or why she assumed Amy would be in a position to get a novel published is a mystery... River did seem to know that Amy would end up with Rory if she let the Angel take her, too and seemed to be almost egging her on. I think River knows more than we do.). Amy only wrote the Afterword to the novel, at River's request (either sent with the manuscript or delivered in person - it was not stated that River couldn't see them again).
  September 30, 2012 at 11:40AM EST
- David To me, it felt like Moffat was trying to replicate the Tennant/Piper ending, with the whole 'I cannot cross this barrier' thing. I get that he was trying to show the price of being a companion, but it felt rehashing. I kept picturing Tennant and Piper crying and unable to touch. Just my opinion.
  October 4, 2012 at 2:58PM EST
nic919

I'm glad that the Ponds were closed off completely. Their story with the Doctor had run its course and having them come back every once in a while like RTD tended to do just ruins the impact of the story when it ends. Ten's goodbye to Rose worked so much better when she didn't come back and end up with his clone.
I did find the end sad, although River seemed a little emotion free on never seeing her parents again. Maybe there will be more to that later on. The cherubs were creepy, but I do hope the angels don't come back. They have served their purpose.
September 29, 2012 at 10:30PM EST Reply to Comment
- Erin If we're still seeing River's story backward, then maybe she already knows that she sees them again. It won't always be 1938 for them, so presumably in a few years she could go back and see them. (Why the Doctor can't, I'm still not sure. Does this mean he can never visit New York c. 1938-2012?)
  September 29, 2012 at 10:40PM EST
- nic919 The Doctor mentioned something about this being a fixed event, which is probably a cop out and short cut to say that he can't see them again. Maybe River can, but now that she is a Professor, it does not seem like she has much time left.
  September 30, 2012 at 12:47AM EST
- Mike I definitely can agree with that and I just like to think of the fantastic Doomsday as Rose's ending. It's funny, I feel like RTD was too obsessed with giving Rose a happy ending, which undercut the tragic and emotionally resonant one she received in Doomsday (one of my favorite, if a bit of a gut punch at the time, moments in the Doctor Who reboot), and I feel like Moffat was too intent on giving the Ponds a sad ending in this one when the decision they came to last week would have been a perfectly satisfying end to the Ponds as companions.
  September 30, 2012 at 3:44PM EST
- Bryan Rasmussen Are we sure that 'River' is River's third regeneration?
  
  I don't think it was stated specifically, and it was one of the things I always had problems with. The idea she regenerated as melody some time in New York and then managed to get across the ocean to grow up with the Ponds. What year was it in New York when she regenerated at the end of Day of the Moon anyway, it was 'six months later' but with Time travel six months later could be in 1938.
  
  September 30, 2012 at 7:04PM EST
- Jack Gemmell @Bryan
  
  The 6 months later was in 1969/1970, so I'd rule that out, although they'd pressumably still be alive, to many variables
  October 1, 2012 at 12:21PM EST
- Bryan Rasmussen @Jack
  
  Did it say 6 months later in the year. If I am in 1969 for 5 months and 29 days and then time travel to 1938 depending on how you measure that it can be 6 months later. In point of fact when I first saw that scene I assumed some time in the great depression, and assumed that the six months later was six months later in the timelines of everyone involved, even if the space time locations was several decades before.
  October 1, 2012 at 3:10PM EST
lazy iggy

My mom has the exact cherubs all over the garden...so yeah this episodedid creep me out. But the angels were just a means to an end, and I had hoped this episode would take them back to blink scare levels. And I really don't believe that they couldn't go back bc it would rip ny apart. The whole premise of blink is based on the fact that the doctor and his companion are trapped in the past.... I have a long list of quibbles... But despite them I did cry t the e....on another note...I wonder if thedoctor is growing more affectionate bc he knows rivers end is near too
September 29, 2012 at 10:39PM EST Reply to Comment
Glen

Remember we all thought that Rose was out of reach of the Doctor? Also, I thought that the last episode with Donna was much better and packed a bigger emotional punch ... just my opinion.
September 29, 2012 at 10:40PM EST Reply to Comment
M.A.Peel

I'm still looking for Sally Sparrow to show up somewhere. Seems a missed opportunity, Angels-wise.

What was River's line to the Doctor about him wanting someone with 12-year-old's face? Who/what was she referring? And then the line about the pain "and the wrist hurts too."

But overall, I liked the closure of Amy choosing for Rory, not the Doctor.
September 29, 2012 at 10:44PM EST Reply to Comment
- Diane River wasnt referring to him wanting a 12 year old companion/lover/wife, but that he himself looks 12 and so she feels she has to hide the damage aging does....as aging means evidentual death and another loss for the Doctor...Of course River doesnt kinow he has already seen her die.
  Thats what I got out of it anyway.
  September 29, 2012 at 10:54PM EST
- Tracey @Diane: Yeah, that was my read too.
  September 29, 2012 at 11:13PM EST
- odessasteps IF only Sally Sparrow hadn't become an Oscar nominated actress that is probably "too big at the moment" for DR WHO... :>
  September 29, 2012 at 11:15PM EST
- M.A.Peel Thanks for the aging clarification. I always need to watch DW twice to get everything. Odessasteps, that is probably the reason.
  September 30, 2012 at 9:21AM EST
Razorback

Let me just copy and paste my review here:

"NNNNNnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!"
September 29, 2012 at 10:53PM EST Reply to Comment
lashawna16

I think I know why the weeping angels were so fond of Rory because Rory has so much in his timeline and to feed off of that for over 40 years could probably add up to most of the people in New York if they all was sent back at least once

September 29, 2012 at 11:07PM EST Reply to Comment
izzy

I disagree with your view on The Angels. At Blink, they were only displacing you, while your original life is gone, you still get to live out the rest of your new life. Then they kill you out right in Time of the Angels/Flesh and Stone. Dead, here I was thinking it can't get worst, but this time they are farming your life, a life not only displaced but no longer your own. You can't run, hide, live any life, trap in a hotel forever. And it won't ends until the day you meet your own self when you first got zap back in time. How could that not be anything buy horrific? So we don't get the tension from the hunt. I still found myself shaking from terror of what they were doing.
September 29, 2012 at 11:10PM EST Reply to Comment
odessasteps

I didn't think they would do it, but I liked the idea that Amy (and maybe Rory) would somehow be given the ability to regenerate, which would allow the Ponds to live on off-screen, but likely allow Karen Gillan to not have to return to the show. (Of course, you can always just say it was an adventure before she regenerated, like we could in theory have melody pond appear instead of River).
September 29, 2012 at 11:19PM EST Reply to Comment
odessasteps

People should also check out the BBC DR WHO page for a bunch of behind the scenes interviews and such with the actors and staff about the Ponds' departure.
September 29, 2012 at 11:22PM EST Reply to Comment
Tracey

I was fascinated by the angels in their first appearance. A little annoyed that the second appearance changed the angels paradigm. Now even more annoyed, because this episode was yet another variation on the paradigm. I loved the character stuff, but the angels stuff just annoyed me.

Note to Moffat: If you want to write science fiction, you need to understand that the fans are obsessive-compulsive about the rules. You can't keep changing the rules.

A friend of mine suggested the other day that the Statue of Liberty would be an angel. And I said that wouldn't work because the Statue of Liberty doesn't cover her eyes. Well, they threw away that rule. Remember the last angel episode, that the image of an angel IS an angel? Did you notice that they kept showing a photo of the Statue of Liberty in the elevator? Did you notice that they didn't do anything with that.

As for the reason that the Doctor can't bring them back: he can't bring them back because he didn't. It has to do with the rules of time, and yes, Moffat is pretty consistent with that. You can't change the things that caused you to do things -- that's a paradox. They wouldn't have gotten into this situation if they hadn't read the book, but the book wouldn't have existed if Amy and Rory hadn't been displaced in time. So Moffat got the rules right on that one.

I don't see any reason (other than contractual) why The Doctor can't visit them, though. And River can certainly visit her parents -- her time travel device didn't have the same problems that the TARDIS did.

Everybody has been assuming all season that Amy and Rory were going to die. So I'm relieved to see that they lived out their full and happy lives, albeit in the wrong time.
September 29, 2012 at 11:26PM EST Reply to Comment
- gco211 If they die elsewhere (which obviously the Doctor doesn't plan to, but the Doctor acknowledged last episode that occasionally companions die), or more specifically, die in a way that would prevent their graves being in that location, it creates a paradox on top of a paradox that could tear apart a huge chunk of reality.
  September 30, 2012 at 1:59AM EST
- This I also thought that Angel "rules" were being broken, but I thought they addressed that in the episode with that one liner about how the angels have managed to convert all the statues in NY- so the Statue of Liberty etc. weren't really Weeping Angels as much as doing their work? I don't know, maybe I'm reaching, and Moffat played a little hard and fast with the rules.
  September 30, 2012 at 10:24AM EST
- Bryan Rasmussen I think the covering the eyes think could be construed as referring to a general tactic employed by sighted angels working in groups. For example a large number of angels in the that season 5 angel two parter did not not have eyes, thus they did not have to worry so much about seeing another angel and quantum locking them. Anyway the worst aspect of this show was the Statue of Liberty, amusing as a concept but was just so problematic that it broke my suspension of disbelief for everything else.
  September 30, 2012 at 8:06PM EST
- Tracey River said something about the angels taking over all the statues in New York, but that line felt like breaking the rules too. The angels aren't statues; they are a species that freezes like statues if anyone sees them. At least, that's how I understood it from the beginning. But who knows what the rules are if they keep changing them?
  October 2, 2012 at 2:09PM EST
- GG Tracey, I agree with you. They've always been presented as a species, one that lives and breathes and moves freely, as long as they aren't seen by anybody. A statue is just metal or rock... apparently Weeping Angels can bring life to inanimate objects, too. They're magicians and murderers!
  October 16, 2012 at 7:12PM EST
J

I wish that had been better, and there's little worse than an ending that didn't go well. Too much convenient making the rules up as they go along, with time, and with the angels. And even with a doubled double suicide, it somehow fell short of the epic sweep the Ponds' romance had in Pandorica/Big Bang. I mean, there's a poetic bookend in having Rory wait 2000 years for Amy, then having Amy zap herself back in time to follow Rory, but I expected something more... involved and puzzlish from Moffat. Chasing him back again and again and again might have worked, and it would have given the Doctor a reason he couldn't go and pluck them back. Something other than standing around and making a single decision in a graveyard.

I will miss Amy and Rory, but it was hard to shake the feeling the show had lost interest in them, this season. I feel they deserved better than this, but maybe the show needed some new blood to reinvigorate itself. Bring on the first Dalek companion! (Or not, or whatever.)

Alan, any chance at getting Moffat for a mid-season/Pond-era post-mortem?
September 29, 2012 at 11:31PM EST Reply to Comment
David (chudleycannonfodder)

You only die twice, but Rory dies three times in just this episode alone!
September 30, 2012 at 12:30AM EST Reply to Comment
- Tracey (grin) What was that line Rory had? Something along the lines of, "so I die. I'll come back. I've done it before." He's like Kenny in South Park. Oh my G-d! You killed Rory!! You bastard!!!
  September 30, 2012 at 12:55AM EST
- jan That was a great line that Rory had--just what we all had been thinking all along.
  September 30, 2012 at 6:51PM EST
- Tracey I found the line.
  Amy: You think you'll just come back to life?
  Rory: When don't I?
  Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant!
  October 2, 2012 at 2:07PM EST
Anthony Foglia

I agree the Angels were nowhere near as scary as their first two appearances, but they still worked well to move the plot around, and give the Ponds a long life away from the Doctor.

There were a few little issues/nitpicks that got to me, but the emotional beats were so strong, it didn't matter. (Wouldn't there be someone in the city looking at the Statue of Liberty most of the time? Why would the baby Angels send Rory to a different place, but not the past, just to then send him back to the past? In "Blink", didn't the Angels live on your remaining time, so would it even be possible to feed on Rory twice? And would it possible for them to send him 70-80 years in the past?)

But when we saw Rory die, and the Doctor knew that Rory had to die of old age, missing Amy, I expected a different solution: Rory would escape, but at the end of his life, the Doctor would bring him back to die in Winter Quay. And either Amy would have to have died early, or old Rory could have just been so happy to see one last time before he died, that would explain his reaction. Still, seeing Rory and Amy decide to jump was heartwrenching.

So, is did the Doctor just leave an Angel wandering around (Green Wood) Cemetery?

(PS: Nice to see Mike McShane, in the role as the collector, again.)
September 30, 2012 at 1:30AM EST Reply to Comment
ed w

It seemed like a lot of random running around and yelling, signifying little and making up rules as they go along. It didn't help that Cougar Song made a return appearance.

Darvill did a great job though, he'll be missed.
September 30, 2012 at 1:34AM EST Reply to Comment
gco211

I loved this episode as an episode but hated it as a capper to the Pond's (Williams') arc. I don't have a problem with them leaving, as I think the time had come, but have severe issues with how they left.

This half season introduced us a major decision, the Ponds choosing to leave, and introduced a family member. While having them considering leaving in advance of this event may have made the Ponds being fully removed from the TARDIS more palatable, Rory's dad had best return or it will be very poor manipulation for the past few episodes.
September 30, 2012 at 1:54AM EST Reply to Comment
SazzyMCH

Well, we watched it as a family and my 7yo was petrified, and that is what Doctor Who is all about.
September 30, 2012 at 2:01AM EST Reply to Comment
Cody

After reading through all of your comments I've decided to post my own. I came here because I was hoping for an answer to a question that I didn't really get. I see a lot of people talking about Amy and Rory living out their lives together, but weren't they still stuck in a small hotel room for the rest of their lives? Didn't they spend decade upon decade stuck in a small prison together? That's every bit as horrific and unjust as any ending I could think of. I kept telling myself things would wrap up in a positive way but they really didnt. I kept thinking "Nah... it's AMY and RORY for gods sake. No way they just leave them abandoned in a hotel in NYC in the 30's for the rest of their lives..." For me that's not a happy ending at all. It's not like Amy went back, found Rory, and they caught the first ship back to the UK... They were stuck far from home in the 30's for the rest of their lives; horrible stuff.
On a side note, in one of the final scenes where The Doctor is in the TARDIS, right before he says "They were your parents" to river, it looked like something had been spliced into the film for just one frame (sort of like fight club.) Did anyone else see that?
September 30, 2012 at 4:18AM EST Reply to Comment
- Stephen Amy and Rory are not trapped in a hotel for the rest of their lives. The hotel in the episode was destroyed, along with most of the angels due to the paradox. The angel that got Rory and Amy was a survivor who most likely just sent them back in time, much like the angels used to and like they did with Rory at the start of the episode. They sent the book to Amy to publish in the past, indicating that she was living a normal life.
  September 30, 2012 at 5:47AM EST
- Mike Yeah, exactly. Given that the hotel was destroyed by the paradox, I read this ending as similar to the way the angels worked in Blink, where Kathy and Billy still live out their lives, just in the wrong time.
  September 30, 2012 at 4:06PM EST
Eyes

A decisive end, but not a very satisfying one. Why does Rory "only sometimes" remember being the Final Centurion? What causes their daughter in New York to regenerate? Why does the Doctor tell Amy that her life "doesn't make any sense"? If we don't see or hear more from them after this 'final' exit, all of this foreshadowing (and that's just part of it) is awkward dead air.

Steven Moffat has many times boasted that he writes shows for smart audiences. He's going to lose that audience, because the stories and the marketing keeps making promises that aren't delivered. Mr. Moffat doesn't have to live up to his own hype because the money keeps rolling in. I'm reminded of those guys like George Lucas or Peter Jackson who control a brand that makes money no matter how ineptly it's handled; he can afford to not be doing his very best work. Moffat will keep using Chibnall, Gatiss and the other sub-mediocre writers in his personal comfort zone. Fortunately, I don't have to keep watching.
September 30, 2012 at 4:57AM EST Reply to Comment
- Joel Their daughter Meolody/River regenerates in New York because she is part Time Lord, from having been conceived in the TARDIS, and then "worked on" by the silence. Go back and watch the Demon's Run episode again.
  
  The Doctor tells Amy that her life doesn't make sense because she was living alone in that big house with no family, which was a result of the Crack in her bedroom wall.
  
  Can't help you on the "only sometimes" remembering being a Roman. Could have done with more explanation.
  
  What the heck has Peter Jackson done wrong??
  September 30, 2012 at 6:07AM EST
- Eyes OK, that wasn't clear: I meant Melody regenerating at the end of Day Of The Moon. It will be very odd if that little incident isn't explained. If Steven Moffat sticks to what I guess are his plans, we will see at least one of the Ponds at least one more time.
  
  Don't know if I'll still be watching by then, though. I don't feel the transition to the Doctor becoming a lone Angry God, which is the next development underlined in red crayon throughout the episode, and glimpsed in the Xmas preview.
  
  And what's Peter Jackson done wrong - lately? King Kong, Lovely Bones, and I can't imagine what junk he's going to pad Hobbit 3 with. Still, his mistakes don't cost him anything, so nothing to worry about.
  September 30, 2012 at 9:46AM EST
- osofine Joel explained a lot of it. I don't know how Melody ended up in NYC alone after escaping (using "incredible strength" according to River, who was the least credible person in "Impossible Astronaut/Day of the Moon") the spacesuit in *Florida*. I also don't know how she then made her way to Britain as a child and insinuated herself in Amy and Rory's childhood. I doubt we'll ever get an explanation on TV - hopefully someone will write a really good novel about Melody/River.
  
  I think that Rory's comment about remembering his 2,000 years "only sometimes" meant that he has compartmentalized that part of his personal history. He lives in the present, with Amy (and the Doctor), and doesn't dwell on those years as the Centurion. Similar to how Amy has trouble reconciling her different timelines: the one with no parents, the one with parents, and the time in the forever day where she, among other things, killed Madame Kovarian. I think that by the time Rory had that conversation he had worked out how to live with his history, and perhaps it was easier for him than it was for Amy at the end of last season's finale. I guess what I'm saying is that I didn't read too much into that comment, other than a welcome acknowledgment by the writers that Rory does, in fact, remember that time.
  
  September 30, 2012 at 12:01PM EST
- Sam Garret Rory only remembers 'only sometimes' because that happened in the previous universe, before the universe was rebuilt by Amy's memory at the end of season 5. Rory presumably has a complete backstory without the doctor, and it was only when Amy remembered the doctor that he was able to be a part of the new universe - and hence Rory has two timelines in his memory.
  September 30, 2012 at 5:00PM EST
Bryan Rasmussen

Anyone wondering about the kid, and two women that were seen in the windows when the detective was going into the hotel. Perhaps the same character at three different ages.
September 30, 2012 at 5:10AM EST Reply to Comment
Caro

It was a good enough episode, but it seemed to me that it just created and answered problems created within this episode itself. Like, it didn't really refer to much else in the whole series, let alone questions raised in all the episodes beforehand.

In this episode didn't anyone notice the statue of liberty hanging around??? Why couldn't the Doctor go to visit them during their life in NYC? If Rory's name was on the gravestone before he got zapped back in the final scenes, and Amy was to follow, why was her name not on the gravestone already as well?

Then, the 'clues' that Steven Moffat said he'd left in The Eleventh Hour. Was that it? That tiny scene with little Amelia? What was all the hype about the duck pond? What about the staircase that went nowhere in Amy's house?

Also one little thing I didn't get, if Amy tells the Doctor to go back to her when she was little and tell her her life's story, and assuming that he went, because there was the TARDIS noise, then does that mean these past 3 episodes, Amy already knows her life story, and knows exactly what is going to happen to her?

The episode left a lot of questions unanswered . . . but still managed to make me cry, in the end :P Bye bye, Ponds.
September 30, 2012 at 6:13AM EST Reply to Comment
- Caro *past 3 series' sorry :)
  September 30, 2012 at 6:18AM EST
- Captaingrim We're supposed to believe that sometime in the dead of night, the Statue of Liberty isn't being observed so it can move. They do move like lightning so that would explain most of it.
  
  The last time paradox Rory caused by dying twice at two different ages in the same place made this region of spacetime very unstable. A further attempt to change history could either destroy NYC, or the planet. That's why the Doctor couldn't rescue them. But I agree he could still visit. That note from Amy seems to mean he'd be changing history if he did visit since she claims he never did.
  
  Amy going back to change history by being with Rory affects her future and isn't the same as a paradox in the past.
  
  There was no staircase that went nowhere, but a room she couldn't perceive. The duck pond was a symptom of the crack eating up things around Amy. They know it's a duck pond but the crack ate up all the ducks so it's empty, just like Amy's house is empty of most of her family due that same crack.
  
  Little Amy might know something of her future, but in terms of children's fairytales not a history book or diary of what's to come. She might not even realize this story is about her.
  October 1, 2012 at 2:48PM EST
- Caro haha yea true, but then does no one try to look at the statue of liberty and notice it isnt there??
  
  Ok i see thanks for that :) but also, couldn't a vortex manipulator get through then? if river could use one to get to 1938 and the Doctor couldn't land the TARDIS there, couldn't he just get a vortex manipulator...?
  
  Yea there was a staircase going nowhere, google it! https://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&safe=active&q=staircase+going+nowhere+amy+pond&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&biw=1366&bih=648&wrapid=tlif134943171554810&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=u7FuUPK-E6jBiQewxoCwCA#um=1&hl=en&safe=active&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=staircase+nowhere+amy+pond&oq=staircase+nowhere+amy+pond&gs_l=img.3...14123.14123.0.14334.1.1.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0...0.0...1c.1.iaMoTM8bm9I&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=65184581e02b4cfd&biw=1366&bih=648
  
  :/ Alright, ok I can accept that . . .
  
  Also, just wondering.. what the heck do people eat when they're at winter quay?
  October 5, 2012 at 6:14AM EST
gerwalk

While this was a sad and tragic episode, the couple trapped in the past. trapped in the past. in an earlier episode they see and wave to an older version of themselves living in the country.
September 30, 2012 at 7:41AM EST Reply to Comment
dougs

In the first Doctor, Amy and Rory scene, after the pre-credit scene set in 1938, why were the Twin Towers in the NYC of 2012?
September 30, 2012 at 7:54AM EST Reply to Comment
- Tracey You mean that first little bit showing a boat going by on the river to establish the scene as New York? I think that's just a poor choice of stock footage. Either that or Amy going back in time changed history and caused 9/11. Take your pick.
  September 30, 2012 at 8:53AM EST
- flo It's the new 1 WTC, we can see it's not even finished.
  October 1, 2012 at 4:20PM EST
damien

I was somewhat disappointed that Moffat would once more drink from the Angels well, as the last time he did that was pretty dreadful having trampled all over the mythos that made the original Blink such a classic.

But thankfully, my fears were unwarranted. it's a great episode, in fact, it was brilliant. A future classic. The angels return to their original creepy best, there's humour, excellent pacing, an interesting story well told and wrapped up and most of all great emotion that made this viewer go a bit misty...
September 30, 2012 at 8:00AM EST Reply to Comment
- jan I agree with everything you said.
  September 30, 2012 at 10:46AM EST
Paul C

Fantastic episode, probably one of the best of the nu-Who era. I liked how there was a finality to it. Sure a cameo down the line say when Smith is leaving would be cool (and likely I'd guess), but that they are least gave the impression this was the Ponds' last appearance helped give it more of an impact.

There was about a 3 minute stretch that put me through the emotional wringer - that the show would have Amy & Rory actually commit suicide to the joy of them waking up in the graveyard, then the gut-punch of Rory dying, but then Amy sacrificing herself.

Always nice to see Alex Kingston too, and hopefully it'll provide a bit of a new take for Smith to take with in the next batch, remembering his lost partners.

Gillan and especially Darvill were quite great throughout and will be missed. However, I do hope they retire the Weeping Angels now.
September 30, 2012 at 9:20AM EST Reply to Comment
John

They did the same "there's no way!" thing with Rosé. Gives the goodbye stakes, but trust me, if Moffat wants to say hi to the Ponds again, he will, somehow.
September 30, 2012 at 10:19AM EST Reply to Comment
- Lucy Karen Gillan said in an interview that she and Moffat had talked and wanted it to be final though, so as not to take away from the impact of the goodbye.
  September 30, 2012 at 5:20PM EST
- odessasteps In theory, you have an unlimited number of adventures to tell with the Doctor and the Ponds that occurred "off screen." I'm sure there will be books and Big Finish/BBC Audios and comics for years and years to come telling those stories.
  September 30, 2012 at 10:03PM EST

Next 97 Comments

News From Our Partners

Follow HitFix:

Follow @HitFix

Get Instant Alerts on What's Alan Watching

Latest Posts

Review: Michael Douglas and Matt Damon dazzle in HBO's 'Behind the Candelabra'

Steven Soderbergh biopic about Liberace is HBO's best movie in years

Friday, May 24, 2013
Review: 'Hannibal' - 'Trou Normand'

Will gets lost in a case, and Lecter tries to protect Abigail Hobbs

Thursday, May 23, 2013
Are you ready for the summer? (2013 edition)

Announcing this summer's blog rewatch series

Thursday, May 23, 2013
Season finale review: 'Modern Family' - 'Goodnight, Gracie'

The Dunphys and Pritchetts head to Florida for the funeral of Phil's mom

Thursday, May 23, 2013

Cannes Film Festival 2013

Inside Television with Alan Sepinwall

Review: 'Doctor Who' - 'The Angels Take Manhattan': You only die twice

Are you a fan of Doctor Who?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

Never miss a post - sign up now to get an e-mail alert whenever Doctor Who is updated

Send to your friends

Direct link: http://tinyurl.com/8krbb7h

Review: 'Doctor Who' - 'The Angels Take Manhattan'

Share this Post on ...

Direct link: http://tinyurl.com/8krbb7h

Review: 'Doctor Who' - 'The Angels Take Manhattan'

Comments

Option 1

Option 2

Option 3

Swearin I know, right? There's a reason giggling, phantom children sounds are used so much in scary movies and shows, it's because it works.

fbihop That he gave no opening for the Doctor to see them was what made it so powerful. Same with Rose and Tennant's Doctor -- and even without the Russell T Davies cheat that he put in at the end.

Isaac Agreed.

Jamie keep in mind, time is frequently rewritten on this show. the doctor has destroyed the entire dalek race on multiple occasions and they keep popping up. the writers may come up with an excuse for amy and rory to come back.

Joseph I'm kind of a Dr Who noob, but why can't the doctor visit them? I think I understand why he can't time travel to NY anymore, but...couldn't he just travel to Jersey and make the drive across the river?

Brendan Joseph- I think the idea is that if he interferes in their lives again, he may alter their future, creating another paradox and ripping reality apart. They HAVE to die at the ages/place shown in the tombstone.

Jason I assume it's a reference to the actor who plays him.

Erin Perhaps more likely a nod to the actor playing Rory, Arthur Darvill?

rugman11 Gah. I didn't even think of that.

Liz But what's River's timeline? Since conception she's been a child of the Tardis itself and her time "line" is as wibbly as they get. Plus, the Dr can always just drop her off a minute after they depart.

Zanzor49 As we have seen in past episodes, River appears in the Doctor's timeline at various stages of their relationship. Could she still be "ahead" of the Doctor at this point and knows that something will come up that will separate them?

Tracey Yeah, I was thinking that River knows that she's going to see her parents again, together in the past, which is why she is so eager for Amy to surrender to the angel, and why she is so sure it will work.

debbie Also, River is now a Professor which brings her one step closer to her death.....

David I would have rather the last two episodes been swapped and the Angels episode ended happily, and then Amy and Rory decided it was time to remain in their normal lives. I found myself not as impacted this way.

lazy iggy I agree...that was the ending I was hoping for...and in my fantasy Amy finally chose a careerand became an author of children's books featuring the raggedy doctor...*sigh*

odessasteps Well, if Amy wrote the pulp novel, what's to say she didn't keep writing books? They did have 50 or so years in that room.

nic919 The Doctor mentioned something about this being a fixed event, which is probably a cop out and short cut to say that he can't see them again. Maybe River can, but now that she is a Professor, it does not seem like she has much time left.

Jack Gemmell @Bryan The 6 months later was in 1969/1970, so I'd rule that out, although they'd pressumably still be alive, to many variables

Glen Remember we all thought that Rose was out of reach of the Doctor? Also, I thought that the last episode with Donna was much better and packed a bigger emotional punch ... just my opinion.

Tracey @Diane: Yeah, that was my read too.

odessasteps IF only Sally Sparrow hadn't become an Oscar nominated actress that is probably "too big at the moment" for DR WHO... :>

M.A.Peel Thanks for the aging clarification. I always need to watch DW twice to get everything. Odessasteps, that is probably the reason.

Razorback Let me just copy and paste my review here:"NNNNNnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!"

lashawna16 I think I know why the weeping angels were so fond of Rory because Rory has so much in his timeline and to feed off of that for over 40 years could probably add up to most of the people in New York if they all was sent back at least once

odessasteps People should also check out the BBC DR WHO page for a bunch of behind the scenes interviews and such with the actors and staff about the Ponds' departure.

GG Tracey, I agree with you. They've always been presented as a species, one that lives and breathes and moves freely, as long as they aren't seen by anybody. A statue is just metal or rock... apparently Weeping Angels can bring life to inanimate objects, too. They're magicians and murderers!

David (chudleycannonfodder) You only die twice, but Rory dies three times in just this episode alone!

Tracey (grin) What was that line Rory had? Something along the lines of, "so I die. I'll come back. I've done it before." He's like Kenny in South Park. Oh my G-d! You killed Rory!! You bastard!!!

jan That was a great line that Rory had--just what we all had been thinking all along.

Tracey I found the line.Amy: You think you'll just come back to life?Rory: When don't I?Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant!

ed w It seemed like a lot of random running around and yelling, signifying little and making up rules as they go along. It didn't help that Cougar Song made a return appearance.Darvill did a great job though, he'll be missed.

SazzyMCH Well, we watched it as a family and my 7yo was petrified, and that is what Doctor Who is all about.

Mike Yeah, exactly. Given that the hotel was destroyed by the paradox, I read this ending as similar to the way the angels worked in Blink, where Kathy and Billy still live out their lives, just in the wrong time.

Bryan Rasmussen Anyone wondering about the kid, and two women that were seen in the windows when the detective was going into the hotel. Perhaps the same character at three different ages.

Caro *past 3 series' sorry :)

gerwalk While this was a sad and tragic episode, the couple trapped in the past. trapped in the past. in an earlier episode they see and wave to an older version of themselves living in the country.

dougs In the first Doctor, Amy and Rory scene, after the pre-credit scene set in 1938, why were the Twin Towers in the NYC of 2012?

Tracey You mean that first little bit showing a boat going by on the river to establish the scene as New York? I think that's just a poor choice of stock footage. Either that or Amy going back in time changed history and caused 9/11. Take your pick.

flo It's the new 1 WTC, we can see it's not even finished.

jan I agree with everything you said.

John They did the same "there's no way!" thing with Rosé. Gives the goodbye stakes, but trust me, if Moffat wants to say hi to the Ponds again, he will, somehow.

Lucy Karen Gillan said in an interview that she and Moffat had talked and wanted it to be final though, so as not to take away from the impact of the goodbye.

odessasteps In theory, you have an unlimited number of adventures to tell with the Doctor and the Ponds that occurred "off screen." I'm sure there will be books and Big Finish/BBC Audios and comics for years and years to come telling those stories.

News From Our Partners

Never miss a post - sign up now to get an e-mail alert whenever What's Alan Watching is updated

Latest Posts

Recent Activity on Facebook

Most Popular on Facebook

About HitFix

Advertise on HitFix

Subscribe to HitFix

Popular Topics

Never miss a post - sign up now to get an e-mail alert whenever
Doctor Who is updated

debbie

Also, River is now a Professor which brings her one step closer to her death.....

David

I would have rather the last two episodes been swapped and the Angels episode ended happily, and then Amy and Rory decided it was time to remain in their normal lives. I found myself not as impacted this way.

lazy iggy I agree...that was the ending I was hoping for...and in my fantasy Amy finally chose a careerand became an author of children's books featuring the raggedy doctor...sigh

Jack Gemmell @Bryan

The 6 months later was in 1969/1970, so I'd rule that out, although they'd pressumably still be alive, to many variables

Glen

Remember we all thought that Rose was out of reach of the Doctor? Also, I thought that the last episode with Donna was much better and packed a bigger emotional punch ... just my opinion.

Razorback

Let me just copy and paste my review here:

"NNNNNnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!"

lashawna16

I think I know why the weeping angels were so fond of Rory because Rory has so much in his timeline and to feed off of that for over 40 years could probably add up to most of the people in New York if they all was sent back at least once

odessasteps

People should also check out the BBC DR WHO page for a bunch of behind the scenes interviews and such with the actors and staff about the Ponds' departure.

David (chudleycannonfodder)

You only die twice, but Rory dies three times in just this episode alone!

Tracey I found the line.
Amy: You think you'll just come back to life?
Rory: When don't I?
Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant!

ed w

It seemed like a lot of random running around and yelling, signifying little and making up rules as they go along. It didn't help that Cougar Song made a return appearance.

Darvill did a great job though, he'll be missed.

SazzyMCH

Well, we watched it as a family and my 7yo was petrified, and that is what Doctor Who is all about.

Bryan Rasmussen

Anyone wondering about the kid, and two women that were seen in the windows when the detective was going into the hotel. Perhaps the same character at three different ages.

gerwalk

While this was a sad and tragic episode, the couple trapped in the past. trapped in the past. in an earlier episode they see and wave to an older version of themselves living in the country.

dougs

In the first Doctor, Amy and Rory scene, after the pre-credit scene set in 1938, why were the Twin Towers in the NYC of 2012?

John

They did the same "there's no way!" thing with Rosé. Gives the goodbye stakes, but trust me, if Moffat wants to say hi to the Ponds again, he will, somehow.

Never miss a post - sign up now to get an e-mail alert whenever
What's Alan Watching is updated