Rate & Discuss 4.2: The Fires of Pompeii

[Rob McCow]

But he didn't have that chance, did he? It was a fixed point that must occur, according to him, so he had to cause that explosion.

But when he saw the aliens were involved he said that what he thought was a fixed point actually wasn't - so he suddenly had a chance to save the people of Pompeii.

Anyway ------- weren't the supporting cast brilliant? Paticularly Phil Davies (?) as Livius. He radiated menace from the moment he stepped through the door. And I absolutely loved that quickfire metaphors in that scene, actually showing the Doctor being properly intelligent. The Augery Bitchfest was great too

[Jason Thompson]

But when he saw the aliens were involved he said that what he thought was a fixed point actually wasn't - so he suddenly had a chance to save the people of Pompeii.

Which, rather unfortunately, undermines his whole spiel at the start about knowing what is, was, should be and must not be. Effectively now he's got no more idea of what should be than anyone else, so now everything is fair game for his interference.

Anyway ------- weren't the supporting cast brilliant? Paticularly Phil Davies (?) as Livius. He radiated menace from the moment he stepped through the door. And I absolutely loved that quickfire metaphors in that scene, actually showing the Doctor being properly intelligent. The Augery Bitchfest was great too

Agreed.

[Zbigniev Hamson]

I said earlier I thought her scene trying to warn the villagers not to go to the beach was one of the key moments of realisation for her. That could have come sooner.

I had absolutely no idea what she was saying in that scene, it just sounded like garbled panicky screaming to me, which is a shame now that I see the significance.

[Zbigniev Hamson]

It's just when you're doing a drama about a tragic event I believe that tragic event should be treated with required respect.

Well I can't argue with that sentiment, but I disagree that writing an alien invasion narrative into the events, in what is clearly a work of fiction, is in any way showing a lack of respect. The real tragedy of Pompeii was what happened to the people, not what caused the eruption in the first place, and I think the tragedy of what happened to the people was hammered home quite strongly. Much more so than in, say, the Up Pompeii film. I don't think anyone's going to come away from this episode thinking that being buried alive in tons of ash is a barrel of laughs, in fact the human suffering and tragedy was essentially the main theme of the episode. What actually caused the eruption is pretty inconsequential, and was just used as the little hook to hang the sci-fi element on in the fictional sci-fi adventure show.

I think science fiction is, and always has been, a strand of fiction that can be used as a tool to explore real human issues. It's a way of exercising the imagination to look at situations that don't exist in the real world we live in today, and then imagining how we fit in to them. To see it as disrespectful to put science fiction elements and real human elements side-by-side is kind of missing the whole point of science fiction in my book. Even if it IS just a lightweight bit of family entertainment.

[Zbigniev Hamson]

I did like the explanation of why the Doctor can prevent an alien invasion in modern day but can't stop a historical event like Vesuvius. Writers have struggled to justify that one for decades, but "Fires" explanation - basically some events are "fixed" and some arn't, and being able to tell the difference is part of being a Time Lord - was surprisingly simple and neat. I'm amazed no-one's ever come up with it before.

It's basically just "Because I said so" or "I'll explain later" redressed to SOUND profound, while still being basically meaningless.

[Si Hunt]

Well I disagree.

Si.

[Logo Polish]

The way I rationalise it is that the Doctor knows what's happened historically, and what hasn't. So, for instance, he knows, say, that the Earth wasn't successfully invaded by the Sycorax or Racnoss in the early 21st Century (if it had, the future it led to would have been different), therefore it's important to ensure that their attempts at doing that should fail. Whereas he knows that the Aztec civilisation was destroyed in the early 16th Century and, for the same reason, can't prevent that being the outcome, just as he also knows that Pompeii was buried in the eruption of 79 AD.

[Perry Vale]

So how do you explain Doctor Who And The Silurians then?

[Logo Polish]

Must have been expecting them to stay a secret, living out in seclusion somewhere (cos they were only one colony ultimately). Plus of course, he'd have also known that, whatever happened, the Silurians weren't supposed to wipe out the humans at that stage either. Well, that, or he thought he was on another parallel world.

[Rob McCow]

So how do you explain Doctor Who And The Silurians then?

Well, Isn't it obvious, my good man? Jon Pertwee's Doctor didn't have time for any of that namby-pamby nonsense!

We won't be able to definitively solve these plot points until someone invents time travel for real. In the meantime, the writers will go on doing whatever they think makes for a fun story. I'd much rather they steered clear of that mind-bending paradox nonsense anyway

[Antony Cox]

I'd much rather they steered clear of that mind-bending paradox nonsense anyway

And that from a man who loves Day of the Daleks!

[Rob McCow]

In Day of The Daleks, the Doctor just says 'I'll explain later, Jo' and that's the end of it!

Styles didn't go back in time and cause that explosion.
YOU DID IT YOURSELVES!!!

[Pip Madeley]

@ Steve

I'll come back to this thread sometime in the week to add my thoughts on the episode.

[Si Hunt]

I think the events that the Doctor has experienced or heard about are 'fixed', anything else can be changed. This isn't as daft as it sounds - if he'd heard about (or experienced) an event, then was involved in changing it, there'd be a paradox - so either he physically couldn't change it, or something nasty would happen if he did (the Reapers?). The line about it being part of being a Time Lord simply means that because he time travels, he is privelaged to be able to be present at events he previously gained a memory or evidence of when he was in their future. A non-time travelling human wouldn't have that problem, because obviously he or she could never encounter an event that had already happened.

Si.

[Carol Baynes]

It's basically just "Because I said so" or "I'll explain later" redressed to SOUND profound, while still being basically meaningless.

Mmmm...is it meaningless though? But it's a difficult one to apply to all the Doctor's adventures, that much is true. He can't change history...not one line....so we were told quite early on. Or can he? Perhaps the future (from where the Doctor originally came from) is more open to his involvement...who knows. Basically the show has to find a way to explain why historical events can't be messed with, and it'll do for now even if it doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

Now, if it was Sutekh on the other hand....

[Jon Masters]

I think the events that the Doctor has experienced or heard about are 'fixed', anything else can be changed. This isn't as daft as it sounds - if he'd heard about (or experienced) an event, then was involved in changing it, there'd be a paradox - so either he physically couldn't change it, or something nasty would happen if he did (the Reapers?). The line about it being part of being a Time Lord simply means that because he time travels, he is privelaged to be able to be present at events he previously gained a memory or evidence of when he was in their future. A non-time travelling human wouldn't have that problem, because obviously he or she could never encounter an event that had already happened.

Si.

I like the simple elegance of your idea, Si - it allows for the Doctor to be mistaken, or to know what events happened without knowing why they happened.
Unfortunately Father's Day completely contradicts you - the Doctor is given specific unambiguous data about Pete's death, but Rose is able to change what happens and the version of history we end up with is different at the end (and only Rose and the Doctor know it). Of course, the story highlights the danger of altering history in this way, but doesn't actually prevent it.

As we've discussed before (stop rolling your eyes Mr Jefferies ), I favour the 'river of Time idea' that came up in the books quite a lot.

[Rob McCow]

In Father's Day there's a number of mitigating factors when compared with other stories changing the past.
- Firstly, it's the Doctor and Rose being in the same place twice that creates a weak point.
- Secondly, the Doctor's companion directly changes her own history in a way that may have precluded her getting on board the TARDIS in the first place.

Perhaps the Doctor is free to change history, but his companions cannot change the history of Earth prior to their joining.

Following this to its logical conclusion, we can see that Vicki was a Time Lady. Of course!

[Paul Monk]

There was apparently a Mary Poppins bit in saturdays episode.

[cyberchris35]

I thought the episode on a whole was better than last weeks. It was a good mix of drama and fun bits. The acting was excellent and so were the visuals.
I think that Catherine Tate as Donna is now growing on me because the episode showed that she can do drama.
One thought that struck me though was that the Doctor had been to Pompeii before, in the Big Finish episode Fires of Vulcan.

[Jim]

He has and whilst I appreciate that Fires of Vulcan wouldnt probably be spectacular enough for a TV episode, I think it is superior in terms of atmosphere and writing. Not to say I didnt enjoy Pompeii, it was visually magnificant, but as others have said I think we could have done without the monster element for one week and concentrated on character and mood of the period.

What Fires of Vulcan has is a feeling of slow impending doom and you share that with the characters. Somehow it felt like there was too much going on to get fully involved here - even Tennant appeared to revert back to series 2 frantic speed of delivery for a lot of the episode. Tate was excellent towards the end thankfully as for much of the first half im not sure she quite convinced, which is bizarre as she did last week.

I have gone for a 7 - you cant help but admire the episode but I was hoping for slightly better characters and wasnt really interested in the monsters this week (impressive tho they were visually)

[Pip Madeley]

One thought that struck me though was that the Doctor had been to Pompeii before, in the Big Finish episode Fires of Vulcan.

I've never counted any of the BF audios as official canon, personally. Some people do, and that's their choice.

I thought 'The Fires of Pompeii' was visually spectacular, if a little less enjoyable than the previous episode, so it gets a solid 8 from me. Tennant was largely on form, with the shouty bit with the high priestess the only lowlight (I hate it when he does that). Loved the water pistol, although I don't think it could have sprayed so high into the air. Catherine Tate continues to impress, her emotional acting at the end deserves credit, but like Tennant, her shouty acting is a little annoying, she was straying into Derek mode in the 'sacrifice' scene. The supporting cast were excellent, and only last night did I realise it was Mad Maya from Corrie who was the deputy priestess. They were very Sisterhood of Karn.

Loved the two throwbacks to The Romans, and the fact they used the long TARDIS sound effect at the end, made a nice change. Decent CGI (considering the scale they were reaching for) and a standout scene with the oracles moving from spouting vague nonsense to displaying real abilities, Time Lord & Gallifrey indeed! Not exactly the most original story, but well written nevertheless.

[P-Bal]

That is all.

[Logo Polish]

Loved the two throwbacks to The Romans

I only spotted one, which two were you thinking of?

[Pip Madeley]

I only spotted one, which two were you thinking of?

At the start the Doctor says he's been to Rome before...

[Andrew Curnow]

What was the other one?