River Song’s bad memory

What’s wrong with River’s memory? or What if David Tennant had stayed for another series?

If you’re a Whovian and you’ve re-watched Silence in the library, you’ve probably spotted a conversation that has now complete meaning but makes no sense. Should you not be a Whovian, you won’t even know what a Whovian is, who River is, and you probably won’t care. Anyway, have a look at this.

Now we know those stories River is referring to are going to be shown on-screen. But isn’t it weird that she can’t see the obvious Ten’s face instead of Eleven’s; which makes it impossible for him to have been there? She also speaks like she’s met Ten before; something that remains unproved.

Knowing River is a clever woman, there’s one only explanation. And there’s evidence of it. David Tennant was expected to stay for another series of Doctor Who. In that case, he’d have climbed the Byzantium with River and Amy.

Here’s an extract of an interview with Steven Moffat in last April issue of Doctor Who Magazine—which I copied from David Tennant news updates.

Had David stayed for one final year, it would certainly have been his last, so my pitch was that it would start with the Tardis crashing in Amelia’s back garden—as now—and a terribly battered and bruised Tenth Doctor staggering out.

Amelia finds him, feeds him fish custard (no that was for Matt, it would have been something more Davidy) and generally helps him. But we, the audience, can see he’s in a truly bad way. Dying maybe. Eventually he heads back to his TARDIS, and flies off.

But when he returns—many years later for Amy—he seems perfectly fine, and indeed doesn’t remember any of those events… And of course over time, we realise what we saw was the Tenth Doctor at the end of his life, about to regenerate. Events that we return to in Episode 13…

There you go. The road not taken. Weird even to think about it now!

So, don’t be too hard on River. She couldn’t have known.

River's face when Tenth tells her he's regenerating to make her look like a fool

River’s face when Ten tells her he’s regenerating to make her look like a fool


Watchmen. Zack Snider; Malin Akerman, Billy Crudup, Matthew Goode, Jackie Earle Haley, et al. United States, 2009.

‘In an alternate reality, it’s 1985, costumed superheroes are part of the fabric of everyday society […]. When one of his former colleagues is murdered, the […] masked vigilante Rorschach sets out to uncover a plot to kill and discredit all […] superheroes. As he reconnects with his former […] legion […], Rorschach glimpses a wide-ranging and disturbing conspiracy.”

I'm not sure I should watch 300 now...

I’m not sure I should watch 300 now…

The plot is quite simple: bad guys kill superhero, superheroes join again, bad guy is really bad. That’s yet another offensively cheap excuse to justify heaps of fights, explosions, weapons and noise; an annoying North American habit that can be cool in a 70-minute film, never in a 162-minute (2 h 42 min) nightmare.

Trust me, there’s nothing on screen for that never-ending time except for special effects. The feeling after one hour of film is that nothing has happened and the action is going nowhere; completely unnecessary.

In the film there’s this question ‘Who watches the watchmen?’ Well, I don’t know who watches the watchmen, but I know who watches Watchmen, people with very little to do and no cinematographic taste at all.

‘The Man from Earth’

The Man from Earth. Jerome Bixby, Richard Schenkman; David Lee Smith.

‘An impromptu goodbye party for Professor John Oldman becomes a mysterious and intense interrogation after the retiring scholar reveals to his colleagues he is an immortal who has walked the Earth for 14,000 years.’

Don't expect any special effects

Don’t expect any special effects

When a friend told me to watch this film she described it as a sort of Doctor Who. She’s rubbish at describing films, I guess. The main character of The Man from Earth is a long-lived man, indeed; however, he doesn’t travel through time more than any normal person does. He’s also had lots of adventures and met lots of interesting people and several personalities. Nevertheless, none of them will be depicted on screen.

That’s not a complaint, though. The whole film is a conversation that John has with his colleagues in an almost empty room. That’s what makes it awesome. As John claims to have been born as a Cro-Magnon, the only thing his friends can do is enquire about his past trying to find some — impossible — way to prove his statement.

How would you prove you’ve experienced history and not just studied it? Would it be wise to prove it anyway?

‘Not Suitable for Children’

Not Suitable for Children. Peter Templeman; Ryan Kwanten, Sarah Snook. Australia, 2012.

“[Jonah’s] life is nothing but huge nights, sex, friends, and very occasionally, sleep. When Jonah is hit with a health crisis and told that he’ll be infertile within a month, he undergoes a massive shift in priorities and suddenly transforms from a freewheeling party-boy into a young man with a burning desire to be a father.”

I beg to differ

I beg to differ

There’s nothing like a comedy to fun up your summer holidays. This one might get quite dramatic at some points, though. It’s, nevertheless, still considered a comedy and it has several funny moments indeed.

As for the plot, the story is as simple as a guy trying to conceive some offspring before it’s too late. Moreover, what I suppose was intended to be an unexpected turn of events becomes obvious to (almost) everyone’s eyes way before it happens.

Even so, the film is still worth as deep issues blend into a comedy performed by an eye-delighting cast, and who doesn’t like these three components? By the way, some scenes are actually not suitable for children.

Interpreting forum theatre

Last Saturday I had lunch with some friends from the swing lessons. We gathered at the terrace of a guy’s flat and shared plenty of food and some dances under the sun —after an heavy storm that had finished by midday. When they decided to take the party somewhere else I had to leave them. But, why?

On Sunday, I was waking up at 8 in the morning to work as a Spanish-English interpreter with a friend on a forum theatre.

The forum theatre is a branch of the theatre of the oppressed by Augusto Boal. The actors perform a short scene with a growing conflict and the action stops at its peak. Then, there’s a dialogue with the members of the audience, who contribute with new points of view and their ideas on how a character could make a difference by changing their approach and who are invited to test their proposal becoming actors themselves in a new version of the scene.

The organizers of the event.

The organizers of the event.

Last Sunday’s event with La Xixa Teatre theatre company was part of a two-day event in Barcelona called “Towards a Citizens Pact: Civil Rights in Europe” and organized by European Alternatives.

It’s a pleasure to take part in this sort of events because of their content and because they are entertaining and enjoyable. Moreover, interpreting together with a partner made it easier for the audience to distinguish the different characters and allowed us some rest. Although working alone would have spared me turning the volume of my headphones down every two minutes after she turned it up thinking it was hers. Fortunately, I noticed the mistake and let her know saving myself from turning deaf.

‘The Big Lebowski’

The Big Lebowski. Jeff Coen; Jeff Bridges, John Goodman. United States, 1998.

“[The Dude] must face nihilists, pornographers, car thieves and a straight-talking artist […] all while trying to prevent bowling partner Walter […] from going over the edge.”

Two tough guys.

This is another film that my friend recommended me. Jeffrey the Dude Lebowski went home one day to find two thugs waiting to recover some money a woman owed them. They were looking for a millionaire that shares his name and he gets involved in a sort of kidnapping.

It sure is a funny film with a surreal story filled with all that stuff I copy-pasted above. But there’s something else I can’t ignore; the script is filled with swearwords. The Dude and his bowling partner use the f word and its derivatives in all their sentences. More than once. A lot more. And I’m not saying that’s a bad thing; it really suits them. But it was specially funny when my brother — who can’t speak any English — came and realized they were cursing and swearing all the time. Two seconds later, a cowboy asked the Dude if he needed to use “so many cuss words”.

Anyway, I liked the film — although it was a bit weird at first; that’s my friend’s taste. But what I liked best was the rich man’s daughter. I’ll have to look for more films where Julianne Moore plays a crazy cool woman.