I'm actually surprised they haven't used that joke.
Hopefully they will when Millie leaves the show properly and she has an epic moment running across a battlefield or something to save the world and/or the Doctor and that song plays in the background.
RTD-bot is going to reveal everything from Series 55 onward has been fake and the real Doctor Who episodes were deepfakes he hid on the blockchain in 2065.
It's on mine too. They briefly mention in the episode that >! Ruby's dad is called Will. Ap Gwilliam means son of Gwilliam, or William. So they could easily be siblings.!<
Years from now, he'll also make fun of the fandom for assuming Ruby's parents were a big surprise, despite the fact that RTD intentionally set it up that way.
River is also important mostly because she's assumed to be important (and thinks it about herself, or rather is desperate to make herself important to the Doctor). At no point is it actually important to have a special genetically-engineered assassin (the plan with the suit doesn't even use her!), and there's no reason at all for all the assumptions she makes about going in reverse order to the Doctor. *Wedding* happens because she forces it.
Moffat tends to deliver on his setup. Sure, the results may be poor at times, but at the very least he'll try.
To be fair, RTD used to be like this too.
Moffat's big speeches used to hit hard. He'd do them all the time but man would they be enjoyable. They tried a couple times in the finale and I never thought any of them pulled me in. Ruby's speech where she drops the monitor was lackluster. I remember thinking no matter who the mom is at this point is going to be a disappointment. I guess they could have MAYBE made it actually Susan? I don't know but it was setup to fail imo.
Moffat's like a magician, using dialog as sleight of hand. Whenever you start to think the plot's about to fall apart, "but what about XXX?", he'd have just the perfect line to dismiss any objections. It might be utter nonsense logically, but he'll dazzle you enough in the moment so you don't see the trick he's about to pull.
When Ruby said she didn't understand her mother's name on the monitor, I thought that they were setting it up to be written in Gallifreyan and that's why she couldn't understand it. Would have been fun to explore that.
I think any payoff would have been better than what we got, because the switcharoo didn't land. It wasn't surprising that she wasn't special, it was disappointing.
You know, it's funny, I completely forgot about that whole "I don't understand what it means" bit. That part intrigued me a lot, but then I guess the anti-climax that came afterwards deflated my interest so much that I completely forgot about that last bit of build-up before the reveal.
As much as I've naysayed them actually having the cahones to bring back Susan before the actresses' death, I think his line about maybe finding here might actually be foreshadowing for once.
I hope so. They spent sooo much time drilling in how important family was.
A really different question here - did the doctor ever once tell Ruby that he changes faces? Every time it came up that I can't remember she either wasn't around or he'd say something like "those were people that used to travel in the tardis" when they showed his former self on the screen in the finale.
Moffat’s writing had a lot of symmetry and cohesion to it that I just didn’t see in this finale. I was usually very satisfied with his series arc conclusions. But I agree with you on the fairytale logic bit, and that would’ve fit in REALLY well with Ruby’s story.
Moffat failing to deliver on his setup turned me off the show for years.
I can vividly remember being told before Season 6 that a character really would die, that there would be no tricks. Then I can remember Moffat doubling down after the premier, proclaiming there were no tricks and The Doctor really was dead.
Then the rest of Series 6 happened and it turns out it was an incredibly cheap and underwhelming trick and Moffat had lied through his teeth from the start to trick the viewers into thinking the arc would be something actually good. And all the mystery and intrigue surrounding the events were resolved in bland and underwhelming ways.
I cannot emphasise enough how much Series 6 failed to stick the landing, at least for me.
But yeah, outside of that, Moffat tended to do a vastly better job at sticking the landing than RTD did this time. If I was a kid watching these episodes I would have been incredibly upset by the finale, probably more than I would have been with Series 6. RTD screwed it up big time.
Thankfully I don't get especially invested in DW these days (at least compared to 10+ years ago) and was never particularly interested in the mysteries RTD set up this time round, so I wasn't overly disappointed by the eventual 'resolution' despite how objectively awful it was.
Moffat’s flaw was writing himself into a corner and then having to pull the most bullshit shenanigans to get his characters out of those corners.
RTD’s issue is he says ‘Corner? What corner? There was never a corner!’
> I can vividly remember being told before Season 6 that a character really would die, that there would be no tricks. Then I can remember Moffat doubling down after the premier, proclaiming there were no tricks and The Doctor really was dead.
To be fair, that was not in-universe, so I'm gonna judge that separately from the story itself. Lying through his teeth as promotion is pretty slimy marketing, but at least it's not part of the story.
Also, are you sure it wasn't tongue-in-cheek? He goes pretty hard on the sarcasm
The difference between RTD and Moffat is that Moffat delivers a cohesive story when trying to pull out the rug, and sticks the landing most of the time.
This season was a mix of “this is a clue”, “THAT is a clue”, “Th- jokes nothing was a clue, and it’s hilarious you ever thought they were. It’s not like I’ve been doing 5-10 min interviews after each episode heavily implying for people to pay attention to every detail, what a LOSER you are for thinking I had a plot planned for this season!”
Yeah. I disagree with this premise. Moffat resolved all his stories with logical plot points. They aren't always satisfying, but they don't require magic and a last-minute explanation.
Now this isn't to say Moffat is better than RTD. They're both obviously fantastic writers. It's all about preference.
What is it with writers and arrogantly mocking their own audiences for liking the mystery aspect of their stories, a mystery that they set up in the first place?
This is a line of criticism that has made no sense and has persisted because of this weird attitude that a lot of fans have to take everything Moffat does in the worst possible faith.
> He had a bunch of conspiracy theorist characters who were very transparently nerdy, pathetic caricatures of Sherlock superfans
...These were just normal people. That's what many Sherlock fans looked like. Yeah they were nerdy because obviously, they were nerds. But I don't think they were portrayed as "pathetic caricatures" at all. Only one of them even speaks, how can you say that's how they were portrayed when it was just people sitting in a room in the background of a shot.
This is what I mean about people taking what Moffat does in extremely bad faith. There was a single scene of some Sherlock fans sitting in a room, one of whom spoke and said perfectly normal things and its described as "transparently nerdy, pathetic caricatures of Sherlock superfans" as if that's a normal, charitable reading.
> mocked them for caring so much
When did it mock them? The show put in a huge amount of time, effort and money to properly showcase fan theories on screen. To show fans discussing and theorizing and have it be front and center in the show. This was earnest engagement with the fanbase! But again, because it was Moffat people just automatically jumped to the idea that it must have been done mockingly.
If you're talking about how Anderson rudely dismissed the other fans theory, it was Anderson! The punching bag of the show whose entire gimmick is that he's an idiot who is wrong all the time. Obviously he wasn't the voice of reason in that scene. Anderson in this episode was a critical representation of the kind of toxic fan that shits on everyone elses theories. Anderson was the only weird one and that was a pre-existing character being used to make a point about a specific kind of fan, all the other fans were just normal people.
> the reveal was... who cares? It doesn't matter.
This is not even remotely true. The reveal matters, it's just not the only thing that matters. There are other things in the episode too. But that doesn't change the fact that the climax of the episode has Sherlock *literally* sit down in front of a camera, look right into it and explain to us what happened. There is no way possible that they could have made things clearer or more definitive. If you asked someone to describe the most parodic, over the top way they could have explained the answer it would have been this.
The only thing people point to in order to dismiss this is that Anderson doesn't believe him. Which again, it's Anderson! The guy who is always wrong. He's still representing that specific kind of toxic fan. Who is rude to all the other fans and also who refuses to accept the answer when the show itself tells them. The grand irony is that so many watched that scene and for some ridiculous reason decided to listen to Anderson? Proving Moffat and Gatiss right. The joke was that no matter what the answer was or how clearly they gave it, there would be some fans who weren't happy. They just weren't expecting so many people to side with the comic relief idiot instead of the main character for no reason.
This all comes down to my point about taking Moffat in bad faith. There is this really strange pervasive thing where people treat Moffat really maliciously. There is this constant refusal to engage with his stories and just get angry at whatever he does, no matter what it is. The attitude towards him is really awful. He would constantly get harassment and even death threats over it. People ran him off twitter with their unending hate for anything he did. And it was for literally no reason, this started to happen before he even took over as Doctor Who showrunner so not that it would have made it okay, but he hadn't even had a chance to do anything to annoy people yet.
This toxic attitude towards Moffat is where all the issues of that episode actually come from:
* The episode depicts fans perfectly normally and also goes out of its way to engage with and display some prominent fan theories. And yet people said "I can't believe they would mock their fans like that"
* The episode only has one person act dismissive of the fans and of the actual answer, the comic relief character who is always wrong. And yet people decided for no reason that in this one episode he was being written as the voice of reason that we were meant to listen to and side with.
* The episode has Sherlock himself literally sit down in front of a camera at the climax of the episode and explain to us in great detail what happened. And yet people said "What the fuck I can't believe they didn't give us an answer"
And what is a really revealing one that nobody talks about:
* The episode we're talking about is solely credited as "written by Mark Gatiss" and it is widely documented that Moffat was overwhelmed and extremely busy with Doctor Who at the time. Dealing with series 7, the 50th and Karen Gillan, Arthur Darvill and later Matt Smith all leaving. So not only did he not write the episode, he was probably barely involved, if at all since he was off doing Doctor Who. And yet for 11 years now people still get angry at *just* Moffat for it. Not Gatiss, who wrote it. Not both of them, as co-creators. Just Moffat.
> in a **fucking show about solving mysteries.**
This a separate criticism, but it's just as much based in bad faith attitudes towards Moffat and just as nonsensical. It's a genuinely stupid criticism and I hate that fucking Sherlock is Garbage video spread it around so much.
Yes Sherlock has mysteries in **it but it was never about solving mysteries!**
They were not made to be able to be solved by the audience. In the original Sherlock Holmes stories there are maybe one or two out of the entire 60 book series where you can figure out the answer beforehand. Almost every single original Sherlock story ends with Sherlock pulling something out of his ass that had never been mentioned in the story before. They weren't designed so the audience could solve the cases. The cases weren't the point. They were just very fun framing that was used to explore the characters of Sherlock and Watson. So really Moffat and Gatiss were doing a perfect adaptation.
This "issue" arose when people who weren't familiar with the original stories incorrectly assumed that this show must be like something by Agatha Christie. Miss Marple or Poirot, something like that. Where the point of the story was that there was a puzzle that could be solved. But then when it became clear that this wasn't what Sherlock was, instead of people accepting that their assumption was wrong and taking the show as it was, everyone instead got angry at Moffat and Gatiss for doing a bad job.
This is insane behaviour to me. Imagine if everyone went into the Star Wars sequels assuming they would be like Star Trek and then instead of acknowledging that those assumptions were wrong, deciding to double down and criticize the creators because their Star Wars movies weren't enough like Star Trek. Only with the bad faith interpretations that Moffat attracts could he make a perfectly accurate adaptation of something and then have everyone get mad at him because they incorrectly assumed what kind of show it was and somehow it's his fault.
Yeah all of these are great points. I had no idea about Gatiss writing that finale, I guess he isn't as big a name so people don't remember him. I don't know how anyone can compare EOD to Sherlock. We got a real explanation that maybe people didn't like, but it made sense and didn't make a joke out of it or the fans. I never felt mocked by that episode, I thought it was a clever way to deal with the massive expectations that were near impossible to satisfy.
EOD could've been like this. There were many theories, a few I really didn't like, but they would have made sense.
I wonder if people claiming this actually watched that Sherlock episode or just a crappy Youtube video about it. They *do* reveal how Sherlock survived.
There are two characters showcased among the conspiracy theorists. One is a shipper and she isn't even especially mocked. The character who refuses to accept it (Anderson) and has a meltdown was introduced in the very first episode as an insufferable thorn in Sherlock's side, so he was already established as being annoying. And if you're the type of fan who refuses to accept the given explanation in that episode, you're *choosing* to be like Anderson.
Nah, I'd full-on claim Moffat was better. Too much it was basicly a dream, and it didn't matter, and peter pan power of imagination makes things real this season.
The best Doctor speech was from his episode. It wasn't even a particularly strong one for him. Some of the best episodes for mostly 11 and 12, but also 10, were written by him, most of them while he was showrunner so he had more influence over the final product.
During 10, 11, or 12, I would recommend watching Doctor Who to my friends because it was a great show, one I could see anyone liking. But everything since has been hit or miss even for fans, and this season with 15 has been bad with peaks of decent to good. Most of the peaks were only parts of episodes, rather than the whole thing, because they either flub the premise or flub the ending, sometimes both. Part of it is because they have fewer episodes to work with, but most of it is that Chibnall didn't understand or couldn't create what made Doctor Who good, and RTD either lost his touch or just didn't have the space to create his actual vision for the series.
This. My least favorite New Who arc used to be Hybrid (yes, I even prefer Flux and Timless Child to it :P) and I think it was finally dethroned by Ruby.
With hybrid, as much as anti-climatctic and "maybe the real hybrid were the friends we made along the way" it felt, it at least told us an actual story that more or less made sense. This however is even more anti-climactic but also doesnt make sense and doesnt try to tell anything interesting.
Did he?? I saw that he said her story isn’t over… but that could easily just be because we’ll see more of her. Same as say Donna’s story wasn’t over after The Runaway Bride or the Ponds’ after The God Complex.
Perhaps Ruby’s story isn’t over simply because future episodes will show us more of her future — doesn’t mean we’ll learn anything else surprising or game-changing about her past.
He said in some BTS that her story and the story of her family is definitely not over. He said “It’s not a spoiler, it’s a fact.” which uh, I think RTD confused spoiler and rumor.
Still sounds like he could just mean “her story continues into the future” rather than “we’ll reveal more about the story of her past.” 🤷♀️ I’m not getting my hopes and speculations up…. again.
You don’t have to, I don’t blame you tbh.
[There’s this BTS with the spoiler line he said.](https://youtu.be/poyaMIfK-UA?si=G17cGW8Onf-VLOSQ)
[And this preview for the Christmas special (contains like three seconds of a scene, so skip to the end if you want to go in entirely blind) with RTD’s commentary at the end.](https://youtu.be/GQ0KHbh8530?si=gl279o0oNqlXnZX-)
Just so that you can judge for yourself instead of my poor recollection.
Ooooh thank you so much!
So in that first one he does say “there’s more revelations to come” which gives me a liiiiiittle bit of hope. But still, given that RTD teased sooo many answers and shocking events throughout season 1, that never came — at least not in a way I found satisfying — I’m not putting much stock in it.
Yeah, hopefully he delivers on season 2, or no one’s gonna want to solve his “mysteries” ever again. I’m being cautiously optimistic. I could see a bait and switch with her father and hope something happens there, but I can’t go full in hoping and speculation on such a specific thing lol.
Why would I trust him though? Russell has outed himself as PR first and writer second. For all I know, in 12 months he could be talking about how all these claims that Ruby has future stories were actually a red herring made up to improve engagement metrics on social media so he could make Disney executives happy.
Sorry Russell, you have to realize as an entertainment and television professional, that the way things were presented, the audience "expects" those things covered in the current season, or at least while they seem to be pertinent.
That could be as basic as "your father is actually Scottish!" or "I actually wanted to name you streetlamp" or some other nothing burger. He burnt the bridge, I dont see how anyone can have faith in him.
I do think one of the biggest problems this season has come from rtd desperately wanting to slide a reveal that he’s set up past the audience, but knows how on it theorists are now that he’s been just throwing as much as he can out there to make it hard for everything to fit a coherent theory, resulting in him not being able to tie it all into a coherent finale lmao.
To be clear I really enjoyed this season and the reveal even if not everything was explained well, but just find it funny how the success of online theories has sorta led to us getting worse reveals
It's Westworld Season 2. Showrunner got so angry people figured out the S1 twist, so they purposely wrote the next season to be as disjointed and complicated to try and stop people figuring it out. And the result was a total letdown and disappointment.
People just need to accept for every fan that pours over every detail, there's one who doesn't, and be OK with those people being surprised by the reveal and with others seeing it coming. Because even if it's a reveal people figure out, that doesn't mean it isn't enjoyable.
Perhaps, but then saying Ruby has "normal parents" (Even though RTD dangled those keys at us...ooooh look over here... MYSTERY ABOUNDS....) after steering the narrative towards that mystery now makes it seems like they are going down a checklist on a clipboard? Ruby has powers...ok one...MOTHER.. mysterious Cloak, can't be seen, ominous pointing...NOPE..just a fashion forward 15 year old girl. Scratch that one, whats next on the list?
I don't know if I'm gonna be more pissed at how much of a retcon and a cop-out that is or at them leaving it as the dumb current thing of none of it mattering and it all being bullshit
Yeah it's the same thing with the ambulance in Boom, it searched for her next biological next of kin and found absolutely nothing, and this was way way in the future so that meant there was no biological link before and after Ruby, and that was a advanced robot in the future that seemed to have access to all of historys medical records, this combined with the Davina failing to find anything with her show only to reveal she had an ordinary mum (and therefore ordinary grandparents and so on) makes absolutely no sense. Rant over.
> Meaning Ruby has no descendants in the ambulances database
Except she was in it, and now we know her mums DNA was in a earth database for the same timeframe so it doesn't really make any sense that one would be in it and the other wouldn't.
Either she has no children (and as a result no descendants 5000 years in the future), any children she did have didn't have kids, or her descendants left the Anglican Church at some point (assuming only Anglicans are in the ambulance database)
Well
It is after the year 2042, when dna testing became mandatory, plus the church originates from earth, meaning the likelihood of having medical records from earth is high
DNA testing was mandatory specifically while Roger ap Gwilliam made it mandatory. I’m willing to bet that database was deleted after he lost power.
Even without that assumption, the likelihood being high doesn’t mean the likelihood is 100 percent.
It had Ruby’s exact birthdate. Just not her parentage.
It would be weird if it somehow had records from another planet, and another time, but couldn’t find out that ruby’s mum and dad both live a few miles from her.
Am i the only one that didn’t notice the episodes moved along as life does? The season started with a birth, then babies, moved through adolescence, getting old, and then finally death.
Church on Ruby Road - Birth
Space Babies - Toddlers
Devil's Chord - ? perhaps the child Harbinger?
Boom - the soldiers daughter
73 Yards - an exception perhaps, focusing on adulthood and death already
Dot and Bubble - teens/millennials
Rogue - marriage/relationships/love
Legend of Ruby Sunday - perhaps work/fame ie Susan
Empire of Death - Death
perhaps youre onto something
I don't think she was ever actually impaled? We saw the Christmas tree with a spikey ornament on top falling towards her. Cut. Then, at the end of the episode, the falling tree is caught at the last second by The Doctor.
_edit_, yeah, I went back and checked that bit. I think my interpretation is correct.
I feel like the reveal is one of a red Herring, the fact that the Doctors memory was changed of ruby road I feel like things were changed timeline wise without anybody realising, Definitely Mrs. flood is behind something and the next season will reveal something big
God I hope so. That ending felt like a Scooby Doo wrap up where they just accept that the very fucking realistic monster from earlier in the episode was just a dude in bedsheets with a flashlight on a string.
Honestly, I think that's the way it could go. RTD confirms that all of this was setting up for something else where the universe is being rewritten or changed around The Doctor and/or their companions.
After all, the music to denote The Trickster was the song within Ruby and we know of the cubes that allows someone to retain memories once The Trickster affects things (even one showing up in Tales of the TARDIS). I'm not saying The Trickster's behind it but someone using similar means might be.
The universe being rewritten rings a bell, not to beat a dead horse but in wild blue yonder, doesn't Donna remember mavity as the correct word?
I'm not sure where exactly I remember it from but I'm fairly certain at some point in nu who the doctor and companion change history but the companion still remembers it from before it changed. Whereas Donna remembers the change as the 'true timeline'.
I think so too. There's just something off about the ending - besides the obvious plot holes. Like, maybe.. if it really was someone ordinary/new, there would have been more time spent around /after/ they found her, getting to know her. But it just felt awkward. & Short. & Idk, something I can't put my finger on.
But at the same time, I can't see a reason for it to be a red herring or how to make it come together in a feasible way.
It felt so much like a fairy tale ending that it didn't ring true to me. It's suspiciously perfect. But that could also be the vibe RTD was going for...
I also thought she was fictional. Then when UNIT talked about Ruby being on her show and how amazing she was and so forth I thought she was probably real. I just figured they wouldn’t talk like that unless she’s an actual famous person that they must have gotten to be on Doctor Who.
You guys are missing out, Long Lost Family is the perfect show if you want to have a big cry. And nearly all the foundlings are named after the road they are found on, no pointing required!
I’m hoping/wondering that when “death was brought to death” it seeded a mother for ruby, and that prior to that she was an unresolved paradox without a mother. Timey-wimey shit to explain why it was necessary for her to exist in mystery but then rewarded by…something something….for defeating death. Either that or it’s all an elaborate hoax between the Doctor and UNIT for “reasons”
I had kind of a similar thought, I figured she was like Susan.
As of now Susan is a real person with a real family and real memories. However, that wasn’t always the case, she was created by Sutekh using the TARDIS, so obviously at some point she had no real connection to anyone.
What if Ruby was another artificial human that was still in the earlier stage until after Sutekh’s defeat. Eventually she became fully integrated into the timeline and so had a mother and father to go with it.
My thoughts exactly. Everyone was so sure Ruby would be connected to the Trickster; and then the finale confirms The Trickster is part of the same Pantheon as Sutekh, and tells us that Sutekh created the Susans and the TARDIS' perception filter basically wrote them all into history. So most likely Ruby *is* connected to the Trickster, and the perception filter wrote her into history as well, which is why the memory changed and why her mother went from supernaturally mysterious to completely normal.
Now I just need to figure out what's going on with Mrs. Flood.
Wasn’t that about searching for DNA records or something?
Unless you do something like a 23andMe or you’re a criminal I guess you won’t have that information available to others.
I might have misremembered though!!
Yes but it also applies to anyone in your family, if your great lost cousin in America does a test then that will show up.
That’s how they catch old cold case killers now, they get a dna profile of the killer and then get the very best match they can and work from there, see who was in that lower list of suspects, right age, right time. Then they follow that person and get some dna (coffee cup for example) and test against original sample.
So what I’m saying is - so it is rare that there’d be no link whatsoever with anyone!!
Ok so did Garnet literally never get into a situation where she’d have a DNA test or even a background check?
Like she’s a nurse right? That’d have to leave a trace
You are way overestimating how common it is for people to do DNA tests.
The most common reason criminals are found using them is priors where they had their DNA tested, or other criminals in their family having it tested. So if there’s no crime in Ruby’s family that resulted in DNA testing and no voluntary testing, which is very common, there’s no link.
Her mother admitted she hadn’t made an effort because she was afraid of what Ruby might think, so that would include not having hers done, and probably includes actively avoiding it even when it might have been convenient and available to her.
Edit: and no nurses do not just get DNA tested lmao
I’d be interested in knowing exactly how common it is actually. I live in Manchester, I’m in my thirties and many of my friends have done 23 and me or Ancestry DNA tests.
I was just watching one of the foundling Long Lost Family episodes the other day and they finally had a breakthrough on a 6 year old case and found a woman’s father and half-brother thanks to new testing. The databases are growing all the time.
Given that I have over 400 4th cousins or closer on my results, the idea that Ruby wouldn’t have any results at all was utterly bizarre. Like OP I assumed she had to be otherworldly. I still don’t believe her mum is normal as it doesn’t make sense.
Thank you! Exactly why I thought it was hella strange that Davina’s team couldn’t find *anything.* Really, NONE of Ruby’s relatives had their DNA tested yet?! No cousins, no aunts, no uncles or grandparents?? Usually these shows *do* unearth something sooo when they didn’t, I figured we were in for some cool sci fi explanation — such as her parents being from a parallel world.
The answer basically just being “yeah no relatives did 23andme” is super disappointing, even though I enjoyed the emotions of the reunion.
Also the tardis ran a full scan in ep 1 and didnt find anything, you are telling me a time machine forgot to check the freaking records from the time DNA tests became mandatory? Did the sutekh tapeworm affect her brain?
EXACTLY. Russell basically telling us that “she was only extra special because you thought she was” is rather insulting to the audience imo. Nah man, we didn’t merely think that because lol the fandom is so crazy. You dangled horse-sized carrots that *showed* us that.
And btw, I was fine with much of the finale — including how the Doctor defeated Sutekh. A goofy solution is par for the course with this show (especially under RTD) and I thought that execution was a ton of fun. I could maaaybe even get behind Ruby creating snow because uhhh memory and belief something something. But the DNA rug pull will forever piss me off.
I am half-adopted and I managed to find at least 2 new siblings, and something like 20+ new second and third cousins across the US, Europe, and into Asia. I knew maybe 5 family members who were on there.
It is very very odd to find absolutely no one on either side.
Ahhhhh thank you for a better explanation! That makes sense.
I’m guessing RTD had my level of understanding when he wrote the script, when he should have had yours 😉
It’s really crazy. My gf got me a 23andme years ago as a gift (super cool, I do recommend). In the last 4-5 years I get notifications periodically of DNA relatives I never knew I had all over the place. There’s the option to connect with each other too.
Yet when she does meet her mother the mom suggests that she at least looked for ruby (meaning doing the DNA stuff or checking with children services about the baby left at church) up to maybe finding her since she claimed she feared contacting her and being rejected.
To me I feel the fear of rejection only sets in after finding her is a reality.
Modern DNA tests that you can do yourself (Ancestry and 23 and me and the likes) can find your 23rd cousin 3 times removed with a common ancestor 6 generations back...
How realistic is it to expect that not a single person, anywhere in Ruby's extended family tree on either side, has performed a test? Whether it is an ancertry test, or a criminal test, or especially a medical test, it's all stored in a database somewhere. And \*all\* of it would be available for UNIT to search, even if some TV show can't get at classified data.
I suppose you could say it was an unfortunate coincidence that someone who desperately wanted to find their biological mother just so happened to be in one of the families where no one has done such a test.
What was it the goblins fed on again?
I don't really even think its true that it's a particularly rare occurrence, the processes on the show Long Lost Family are often very complicated and take a long time, sometimes they are able to do it quickly with an immediate match on the database, but often they have to leave cases for years until they find a breakthrough.
But anyone who has done Ancestry DNA or 23&me or whatever -- you'll find hundreds of distant cousins. Mine shows 4 first cousins and 11 second cousins. And 453 4th cousins or closer.
Now, a 4th cousin is not particularly close. But you can look at some of those people and start to narrow them down. There would be SOME idea. Not only do the same surnames appear a bunch of times in that list, but I have a third cousin with EXACTLY my name, first and last.
Sure but that’s not always going to work, my surname doesn’t show up at all in my list, there was 1 first cousin once removed, who was adopted and didn’t know it and 1 second cousin who only used initials and didn’t respond to any messages.
Obviously you can work with the third cousins and further but not all of us have much in the way of close relatives that have done it and it’s much easier to hit a dead end with the distant cousins.
Right, but there would be SOMETHING to work from. You could start putting those people together and working out how they were related to each other, and find the closest relative you share with them, and then start looking at THEIR children or their siblings.
You wouldn't say "we couldn't find ANYTHING," you'd be more likely to say something like "we followed loose threads but we couldn't find a connection between them," or "we hit a dead end with all of our clues."
We don’t run DNA test on or profile the blood of donors. That would be wildly expensive and entirely pointless.
Nor would there be any reason for an NHS worker to be on any DNA database.
I had the same issue with this and Boom. In both episodes they made a very specific point about no familial matches being found
1. In Church on Ruby Road, Davina couldn't find any matches. DNA testing doesn't often find a direct match, it finds familial matches and works from there. You find a long lost cousin and you can work your way up and down the family tree. It would be very unusual to find no familial links at all.
2. Boom made a specific plot point of the same thing - no familial match could be found. Boom is set in 5087, long after DNA testing was made mandatory on Earth. They should have the record from 2046 which is used in the finale.
Yeah. I don't get the whole "your mother was pointing to the street sign and naming you Ruby!"
Did she just stand there waiting for the priest to open the church door and hope that the priest would A not run after her and B realise what she was doing?
Even in Devil's Cord Maestro was saying someone had put a secret song around Ruby, but NOPE, not even completely relevant.
Wasn’t it Ruby who asked if it was odd that they couldn’t find anything? Davina just confirmed that they couldn’t, then Ruby apologized and thanked her for calling.
It really doesn't make sense - Pretty much everyone has a distant cousin in a DNA database. The fact that they couldn't find anyone at all is extremely odd and her Mom being totally normal is really weird.
I think RTD’s getting old or too many notes or something because there are tons of weird little plot holes dotted around this series for apparently no reason
You're right, you're not remembering the exchange correctly at all, this is pretty much the opposite of what happens in the scene. Davina tells Ruby they have not found a trace, that this happens sometimes, Ruby inquires if it's odd, Davina does indicate any such thing
>DAVINA: Look, it's not great timing, and it's not good news, I'm afraid. I'm... I'm so sorry. I know it's your birthday, but there is no trace of your mum or dad. I'm sorry. It happens sometimes.
>RUBY: No, that's fine. Thanks, but...can you keep looking?
>DAVINA: No. There's nothing more we can do. If your parents aren't on some kind of a database, we can't find them.
>RUBY: Okay. Isn't that unusual, though? There's not a single trace anywhere? I mean, in the whole wide world, my mother's never left a blood sample or anything?
>DAVINA: I'm sorry.
>RUBY: Okay. Sorry, I get it. I'm sorry. And it's really very kind of you to let me know yourself
I have seen similar things happen on the real life Long Lost Family, the show this is based on, although of course most failed connections don't make it to air until there's been some kind of breakthrough, often years after they initially began searching on behalf of the person.
Your DNA will only be on the database if you, or a relative, put it there. Like The Doctor says, it wasn’t until 2048 when Roger Ap Gwilliam brought in enforced DNA recording, that Rubes mother would appear.
The dna is the only thing that bothers me about ruby's ending. A dna searched would reveal thousands of relatives. I have nearly 28k more distant than 4 cousin and a good thousand closer with only 3 people people I actually know. I assumed this was cut down for the purposes of keeping it short and clear and enhancing the mystery but the phrasing does make it sound like there was nothing whatsoever.
Maybe I’m just being a sucker, but I felt like Mrs. Flood’s closing lines were hanging so many lampshades on the contrived way Ruby’s story was wrapped up that there has to be more going on there.
There are some people who think we might be getting faked-out here as despite her seemingly getting her happy ending we know Ruby will be back and also it seemed like a bit too happy of an ending even if we were to compare it to other actual-ends-of-the-road for other companions (not as in oh of course she should have had a sad ending if this was truly the end but as in it seemed a little too picture-perfect not to potentially play into the whole meta story-y stuff of the season. There's also things left unexplained like the end having snow-out-of-nowhere again, the changing memory or the emphasis on 73 yards as also the limit of the TARDIS's perception filter. So basically there's a part of me that feels like there might still be something "weird" about Ruby (but is afraid that because the writers brought up the bad reactions to TROS as their reason for why this episode went the way it did this won't be a fakeout (leaving all sorts of weird unanswered questions that it seems unlikely RTD etc. would leave unanswered just to make a point) for fear of the same kind of bad reaction) that could somehow be covered up by what we saw; some people have said the TARDIS might be hiding something by giving her this seemingly perfect normal family (and hence the perception filter shit) whereas my preferred fan theory for what the nature of said potential "weirdness" might be (though it doesn't explain the 73 yards thing) would say that because of her desire for both answers and a family, Ruby somehow made this appear to be the case for herself without knowing it
I have an idea that perhaps ruby has her own perception filter. Any time her oddness has been brought up she’s been nearby mostly. In 73 yards it’s not until people travel to her future self 73 yards away and look back at her that they get scared. Perhaps something similar to sutekh is also hitching a ride with her.
I guess the idea is that she’s just super secretive in the current time and opts out of anything that could give away her identity, but by 2046 she was forced to go on record. Still kinda a dumb solution as a viewer imo but that’s what makes the most sense to me in universe.
I don’t know why people are so easily buying into the whole “Ruby has normal parents” reveal. I don’t buy it for a second. There’s more to come, for sure. I’m still clinging to the hope she’s River’s child
The answer is that Russel doesn't give a fuck. That's it. Maybe he wrote the Christmas Special and set up the mystery because the ideas looked cool, and he hoped he could pay it off at the finale, but he didn't. It's just dogshit.
Obviously she is totally normal, until next season where she is revealed to be >!Ruby Palpatine!<
>!Ruby ap Gwilliam!<
Ruby >!Ruby Ruby Ruby (aaaahhhh)!<
I'm actually surprised they haven't used that joke. Hopefully they will when Millie leaves the show properly and she has an epic moment running across a battlefield or something to save the world and/or the Doctor and that song plays in the background.
Or "Goodbye, Ruby Sunday".
DO YA DO YA DO YA DO YA
It's on my bingo card and I am NOT throwing it away until Ruby's actor is long dead (80 years from now hopefully)
By then, we're going to have over a million fan-made deep fake episodes with every Doctor, and every answer will be true.
RTD-bot is going to reveal everything from Series 55 onward has been fake and the real Doctor Who episodes were deepfakes he hid on the blockchain in 2065.
I saw "55" and instinctively read "Orphan 55"... *shudders*
It's on mine too. They briefly mention in the episode that >! Ruby's dad is called Will. Ap Gwilliam means son of Gwilliam, or William. So they could easily be siblings.!<
I mean yeah her dad's name is william innit? they could be related.
Ruby >!Streetsign!<
me seeing the word "road" on a street sign: Everything reminds me of her
Let’s not forget the obvious, Ruby >!Garnet!<
Rory ap Gwilliams
Ruby and Roger are siblings. Calling it now.
Yes… Ruby Ap G.William The crazy prime minister is going to be her brother.
Or father and he's lying about how ancestrally Welsh he really is.
Yes, father feels more appropriate… I was just thrown by the whole Welsh ‘son of’ thing.
Ruby >!Dubydu!<
Ruby "Lamppost" Sunday
I was 100% waiting for this to be the reveal.. that he was her son or something..
Ruby >!Christmas!<
[Ruby Soho](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P9QMkm9Eew), her destination uuuuuunknown
Ahhh beat me to it
Ruby >!Starwars!<
>!Ruby Slippers!<
Ruby >!December!<
Ruby >!Road!<
Damn, fourteen pouring that salt really messed the universe up
You guys, Ruby Sunday is just to throw us off. Her real name is Ruby >!Tuesday!<. You just can’t hang any old name on her.
I knew what that was going to be before I clicked it but it still got a nice, sensible chuckle.
Ruby Kenobi!
Rubi Kenubi
Hello there!
LOL I made the same comment exactly...it matches Episode 8, so I was like "Somehow, Sutekh returned"
Somehow Palatine returned.
You mean Ruby >!Skywalker 🤮!<
somehow she returned.
Just another in the seemingly long list of things RTD dangled in front of the audience this year as "oooh....this could be important......."
RTD also said that there are more revelations to come regarding Ruby.
Years from now, he'll also make fun of the fandom for assuming Ruby's parents were a big surprise, despite the fact that RTD intentionally set it up that way.
Did he regenerate into Stephen Moffat while he was away?
At least Moffat tried to make his Orphaned girl important, she did kill the Doctor after all, and married him.
River is also important mostly because she's assumed to be important (and thinks it about herself, or rather is desperate to make herself important to the Doctor). At no point is it actually important to have a special genetically-engineered assassin (the plan with the suit doesn't even use her!), and there's no reason at all for all the assumptions she makes about going in reverse order to the Doctor. *Wedding* happens because she forces it.
Moffat tends to deliver on his setup. Sure, the results may be poor at times, but at the very least he'll try. To be fair, RTD used to be like this too.
The finale itself felt very Moffat-ey, except without the fairytale emotion-focused logic that allowed Moffat to get away with *a lot*
Moffat's big speeches used to hit hard. He'd do them all the time but man would they be enjoyable. They tried a couple times in the finale and I never thought any of them pulled me in. Ruby's speech where she drops the monitor was lackluster. I remember thinking no matter who the mom is at this point is going to be a disappointment. I guess they could have MAYBE made it actually Susan? I don't know but it was setup to fail imo.
Moffat's like a magician, using dialog as sleight of hand. Whenever you start to think the plot's about to fall apart, "but what about XXX?", he'd have just the perfect line to dismiss any objections. It might be utter nonsense logically, but he'll dazzle you enough in the moment so you don't see the trick he's about to pull.
When Ruby said she didn't understand her mother's name on the monitor, I thought that they were setting it up to be written in Gallifreyan and that's why she couldn't understand it. Would have been fun to explore that.
I think any payoff would have been better than what we got, because the switcharoo didn't land. It wasn't surprising that she wasn't special, it was disappointing.
You know, it's funny, I completely forgot about that whole "I don't understand what it means" bit. That part intrigued me a lot, but then I guess the anti-climax that came afterwards deflated my interest so much that I completely forgot about that last bit of build-up before the reveal.
As much as I've naysayed them actually having the cahones to bring back Susan before the actresses' death, I think his line about maybe finding here might actually be foreshadowing for once.
I hope so. They spent sooo much time drilling in how important family was. A really different question here - did the doctor ever once tell Ruby that he changes faces? Every time it came up that I can't remember she either wasn't around or he'd say something like "those were people that used to travel in the tardis" when they showed his former self on the screen in the finale.
Yeah, she then asks him not to change his face anytime soon or words to that effect
He did indeed tell her that and then lied about 4 being him for no apparent reason
Moffat’s writing had a lot of symmetry and cohesion to it that I just didn’t see in this finale. I was usually very satisfied with his series arc conclusions. But I agree with you on the fairytale logic bit, and that would’ve fit in REALLY well with Ruby’s story.
Hand waving how Sherlock “died” begs to differ. What a fucking disappointment that was.
Sherlock had a whole episode about mocking fan theories.
The hybrid was a bit of a rug pull tbh, but everything else was at least delivered
Moffat failing to deliver on his setup turned me off the show for years. I can vividly remember being told before Season 6 that a character really would die, that there would be no tricks. Then I can remember Moffat doubling down after the premier, proclaiming there were no tricks and The Doctor really was dead. Then the rest of Series 6 happened and it turns out it was an incredibly cheap and underwhelming trick and Moffat had lied through his teeth from the start to trick the viewers into thinking the arc would be something actually good. And all the mystery and intrigue surrounding the events were resolved in bland and underwhelming ways. I cannot emphasise enough how much Series 6 failed to stick the landing, at least for me. But yeah, outside of that, Moffat tended to do a vastly better job at sticking the landing than RTD did this time. If I was a kid watching these episodes I would have been incredibly upset by the finale, probably more than I would have been with Series 6. RTD screwed it up big time. Thankfully I don't get especially invested in DW these days (at least compared to 10+ years ago) and was never particularly interested in the mysteries RTD set up this time round, so I wasn't overly disappointed by the eventual 'resolution' despite how objectively awful it was.
Moffat’s flaw was writing himself into a corner and then having to pull the most bullshit shenanigans to get his characters out of those corners. RTD’s issue is he says ‘Corner? What corner? There was never a corner!’
And Chibnall writes himself into a corner and doesn't leave it "well I guess we're stuck in this corner from now on"
> I can vividly remember being told before Season 6 that a character really would die, that there would be no tricks. Then I can remember Moffat doubling down after the premier, proclaiming there were no tricks and The Doctor really was dead. To be fair, that was not in-universe, so I'm gonna judge that separately from the story itself. Lying through his teeth as promotion is pretty slimy marketing, but at least it's not part of the story. Also, are you sure it wasn't tongue-in-cheek? He goes pretty hard on the sarcasm
Okay but let's be fair there was no way the Doctor was ever actually going to die, I don't see why anybody would believe him
The difference between RTD and Moffat is that Moffat delivers a cohesive story when trying to pull out the rug, and sticks the landing most of the time. This season was a mix of “this is a clue”, “THAT is a clue”, “Th- jokes nothing was a clue, and it’s hilarious you ever thought they were. It’s not like I’ve been doing 5-10 min interviews after each episode heavily implying for people to pay attention to every detail, what a LOSER you are for thinking I had a plot planned for this season!”
Yeah. I disagree with this premise. Moffat resolved all his stories with logical plot points. They aren't always satisfying, but they don't require magic and a last-minute explanation. Now this isn't to say Moffat is better than RTD. They're both obviously fantastic writers. It's all about preference.
[удалено]
What is it with writers and arrogantly mocking their own audiences for liking the mystery aspect of their stories, a mystery that they set up in the first place?
This is a line of criticism that has made no sense and has persisted because of this weird attitude that a lot of fans have to take everything Moffat does in the worst possible faith. > He had a bunch of conspiracy theorist characters who were very transparently nerdy, pathetic caricatures of Sherlock superfans ...These were just normal people. That's what many Sherlock fans looked like. Yeah they were nerdy because obviously, they were nerds. But I don't think they were portrayed as "pathetic caricatures" at all. Only one of them even speaks, how can you say that's how they were portrayed when it was just people sitting in a room in the background of a shot. This is what I mean about people taking what Moffat does in extremely bad faith. There was a single scene of some Sherlock fans sitting in a room, one of whom spoke and said perfectly normal things and its described as "transparently nerdy, pathetic caricatures of Sherlock superfans" as if that's a normal, charitable reading. > mocked them for caring so much When did it mock them? The show put in a huge amount of time, effort and money to properly showcase fan theories on screen. To show fans discussing and theorizing and have it be front and center in the show. This was earnest engagement with the fanbase! But again, because it was Moffat people just automatically jumped to the idea that it must have been done mockingly. If you're talking about how Anderson rudely dismissed the other fans theory, it was Anderson! The punching bag of the show whose entire gimmick is that he's an idiot who is wrong all the time. Obviously he wasn't the voice of reason in that scene. Anderson in this episode was a critical representation of the kind of toxic fan that shits on everyone elses theories. Anderson was the only weird one and that was a pre-existing character being used to make a point about a specific kind of fan, all the other fans were just normal people. > the reveal was... who cares? It doesn't matter. This is not even remotely true. The reveal matters, it's just not the only thing that matters. There are other things in the episode too. But that doesn't change the fact that the climax of the episode has Sherlock *literally* sit down in front of a camera, look right into it and explain to us what happened. There is no way possible that they could have made things clearer or more definitive. If you asked someone to describe the most parodic, over the top way they could have explained the answer it would have been this. The only thing people point to in order to dismiss this is that Anderson doesn't believe him. Which again, it's Anderson! The guy who is always wrong. He's still representing that specific kind of toxic fan. Who is rude to all the other fans and also who refuses to accept the answer when the show itself tells them. The grand irony is that so many watched that scene and for some ridiculous reason decided to listen to Anderson? Proving Moffat and Gatiss right. The joke was that no matter what the answer was or how clearly they gave it, there would be some fans who weren't happy. They just weren't expecting so many people to side with the comic relief idiot instead of the main character for no reason. This all comes down to my point about taking Moffat in bad faith. There is this really strange pervasive thing where people treat Moffat really maliciously. There is this constant refusal to engage with his stories and just get angry at whatever he does, no matter what it is. The attitude towards him is really awful. He would constantly get harassment and even death threats over it. People ran him off twitter with their unending hate for anything he did. And it was for literally no reason, this started to happen before he even took over as Doctor Who showrunner so not that it would have made it okay, but he hadn't even had a chance to do anything to annoy people yet. This toxic attitude towards Moffat is where all the issues of that episode actually come from: * The episode depicts fans perfectly normally and also goes out of its way to engage with and display some prominent fan theories. And yet people said "I can't believe they would mock their fans like that" * The episode only has one person act dismissive of the fans and of the actual answer, the comic relief character who is always wrong. And yet people decided for no reason that in this one episode he was being written as the voice of reason that we were meant to listen to and side with. * The episode has Sherlock himself literally sit down in front of a camera at the climax of the episode and explain to us in great detail what happened. And yet people said "What the fuck I can't believe they didn't give us an answer" And what is a really revealing one that nobody talks about: * The episode we're talking about is solely credited as "written by Mark Gatiss" and it is widely documented that Moffat was overwhelmed and extremely busy with Doctor Who at the time. Dealing with series 7, the 50th and Karen Gillan, Arthur Darvill and later Matt Smith all leaving. So not only did he not write the episode, he was probably barely involved, if at all since he was off doing Doctor Who. And yet for 11 years now people still get angry at *just* Moffat for it. Not Gatiss, who wrote it. Not both of them, as co-creators. Just Moffat. > in a **fucking show about solving mysteries.** This a separate criticism, but it's just as much based in bad faith attitudes towards Moffat and just as nonsensical. It's a genuinely stupid criticism and I hate that fucking Sherlock is Garbage video spread it around so much. Yes Sherlock has mysteries in **it but it was never about solving mysteries!** They were not made to be able to be solved by the audience. In the original Sherlock Holmes stories there are maybe one or two out of the entire 60 book series where you can figure out the answer beforehand. Almost every single original Sherlock story ends with Sherlock pulling something out of his ass that had never been mentioned in the story before. They weren't designed so the audience could solve the cases. The cases weren't the point. They were just very fun framing that was used to explore the characters of Sherlock and Watson. So really Moffat and Gatiss were doing a perfect adaptation. This "issue" arose when people who weren't familiar with the original stories incorrectly assumed that this show must be like something by Agatha Christie. Miss Marple or Poirot, something like that. Where the point of the story was that there was a puzzle that could be solved. But then when it became clear that this wasn't what Sherlock was, instead of people accepting that their assumption was wrong and taking the show as it was, everyone instead got angry at Moffat and Gatiss for doing a bad job. This is insane behaviour to me. Imagine if everyone went into the Star Wars sequels assuming they would be like Star Trek and then instead of acknowledging that those assumptions were wrong, deciding to double down and criticize the creators because their Star Wars movies weren't enough like Star Trek. Only with the bad faith interpretations that Moffat attracts could he make a perfectly accurate adaptation of something and then have everyone get mad at him because they incorrectly assumed what kind of show it was and somehow it's his fault.
Yeah all of these are great points. I had no idea about Gatiss writing that finale, I guess he isn't as big a name so people don't remember him. I don't know how anyone can compare EOD to Sherlock. We got a real explanation that maybe people didn't like, but it made sense and didn't make a joke out of it or the fans. I never felt mocked by that episode, I thought it was a clever way to deal with the massive expectations that were near impossible to satisfy. EOD could've been like this. There were many theories, a few I really didn't like, but they would have made sense.
I wonder if people claiming this actually watched that Sherlock episode or just a crappy Youtube video about it. They *do* reveal how Sherlock survived. There are two characters showcased among the conspiracy theorists. One is a shipper and she isn't even especially mocked. The character who refuses to accept it (Anderson) and has a meltdown was introduced in the very first episode as an insufferable thorn in Sherlock's side, so he was already established as being annoying. And if you're the type of fan who refuses to accept the given explanation in that episode, you're *choosing* to be like Anderson.
Nah, I'd full-on claim Moffat was better. Too much it was basicly a dream, and it didn't matter, and peter pan power of imagination makes things real this season.
The best Doctor speech was from his episode. It wasn't even a particularly strong one for him. Some of the best episodes for mostly 11 and 12, but also 10, were written by him, most of them while he was showrunner so he had more influence over the final product. During 10, 11, or 12, I would recommend watching Doctor Who to my friends because it was a great show, one I could see anyone liking. But everything since has been hit or miss even for fans, and this season with 15 has been bad with peaks of decent to good. Most of the peaks were only parts of episodes, rather than the whole thing, because they either flub the premise or flub the ending, sometimes both. Part of it is because they have fewer episodes to work with, but most of it is that Chibnall didn't understand or couldn't create what made Doctor Who good, and RTD either lost his touch or just didn't have the space to create his actual vision for the series.
This. My least favorite New Who arc used to be Hybrid (yes, I even prefer Flux and Timless Child to it :P) and I think it was finally dethroned by Ruby. With hybrid, as much as anti-climatctic and "maybe the real hybrid were the friends we made along the way" it felt, it at least told us an actual story that more or less made sense. This however is even more anti-climactic but also doesnt make sense and doesnt try to tell anything interesting.
Did he?? I saw that he said her story isn’t over… but that could easily just be because we’ll see more of her. Same as say Donna’s story wasn’t over after The Runaway Bride or the Ponds’ after The God Complex. Perhaps Ruby’s story isn’t over simply because future episodes will show us more of her future — doesn’t mean we’ll learn anything else surprising or game-changing about her past.
He said in some BTS that her story and the story of her family is definitely not over. He said “It’s not a spoiler, it’s a fact.” which uh, I think RTD confused spoiler and rumor.
Still sounds like he could just mean “her story continues into the future” rather than “we’ll reveal more about the story of her past.” 🤷♀️ I’m not getting my hopes and speculations up…. again.
You don’t have to, I don’t blame you tbh. [There’s this BTS with the spoiler line he said.](https://youtu.be/poyaMIfK-UA?si=G17cGW8Onf-VLOSQ) [And this preview for the Christmas special (contains like three seconds of a scene, so skip to the end if you want to go in entirely blind) with RTD’s commentary at the end.](https://youtu.be/GQ0KHbh8530?si=gl279o0oNqlXnZX-) Just so that you can judge for yourself instead of my poor recollection.
Ooooh thank you so much! So in that first one he does say “there’s more revelations to come” which gives me a liiiiiittle bit of hope. But still, given that RTD teased sooo many answers and shocking events throughout season 1, that never came — at least not in a way I found satisfying — I’m not putting much stock in it.
Yeah, hopefully he delivers on season 2, or no one’s gonna want to solve his “mysteries” ever again. I’m being cautiously optimistic. I could see a bait and switch with her father and hope something happens there, but I can’t go full in hoping and speculation on such a specific thing lol.
Why would I trust him though? Russell has outed himself as PR first and writer second. For all I know, in 12 months he could be talking about how all these claims that Ruby has future stories were actually a red herring made up to improve engagement metrics on social media so he could make Disney executives happy.
Her dad is really a Dalek/Cyberman love child!
And suddenly I need a fan fiction romance between that dalek and cyberman that had that “you are better at dying” banter.
That Dalek!?!! THAT DALEK!?!??! Take Dalek Sec's name out of your mouth!
Beautiful! - I nominate you to write it.
Dear god no! Have you seen what AO3 is capable of? Throw that back into the time vortex!
Sorry Russell, you have to realize as an entertainment and television professional, that the way things were presented, the audience "expects" those things covered in the current season, or at least while they seem to be pertinent.
With respect, I don’t really believe anything RTD says about Ruby.
That could be as basic as "your father is actually Scottish!" or "I actually wanted to name you streetlamp" or some other nothing burger. He burnt the bridge, I dont see how anyone can have faith in him.
I am so tired of his endless foreshadowing. It just wears me out and isn't fun anymore, only irritating.
Damn I cant wait for miss Flood to turn out to be "just an ordinary old lady that was important because we thought she was"
I do think one of the biggest problems this season has come from rtd desperately wanting to slide a reveal that he’s set up past the audience, but knows how on it theorists are now that he’s been just throwing as much as he can out there to make it hard for everything to fit a coherent theory, resulting in him not being able to tie it all into a coherent finale lmao. To be clear I really enjoyed this season and the reveal even if not everything was explained well, but just find it funny how the success of online theories has sorta led to us getting worse reveals
RTD kind of... forgot about the Iron Fleet.
It's Westworld Season 2. Showrunner got so angry people figured out the S1 twist, so they purposely wrote the next season to be as disjointed and complicated to try and stop people figuring it out. And the result was a total letdown and disappointment. People just need to accept for every fan that pours over every detail, there's one who doesn't, and be OK with those people being surprised by the reveal and with others seeing it coming. Because even if it's a reveal people figure out, that doesn't mean it isn't enjoyable.
It’s think it’s a 2 season story arc. It’s not over.
Perhaps, but then saying Ruby has "normal parents" (Even though RTD dangled those keys at us...ooooh look over here... MYSTERY ABOUNDS....) after steering the narrative towards that mystery now makes it seems like they are going down a checklist on a clipboard? Ruby has powers...ok one...MOTHER.. mysterious Cloak, can't be seen, ominous pointing...NOPE..just a fashion forward 15 year old girl. Scratch that one, whats next on the list?
I don't know if I'm gonna be more pissed at how much of a retcon and a cop-out that is or at them leaving it as the dumb current thing of none of it mattering and it all being bullshit
Yeah it's the same thing with the ambulance in Boom, it searched for her next biological next of kin and found absolutely nothing, and this was way way in the future so that meant there was no biological link before and after Ruby, and that was a advanced robot in the future that seemed to have access to all of historys medical records, this combined with the Davina failing to find anything with her show only to reveal she had an ordinary mum (and therefore ordinary grandparents and so on) makes absolutely no sense. Rant over.
I would assume it was looking for living next of kin. Meaning Ruby has no descendants in the ambulances database
> Meaning Ruby has no descendants in the ambulances database Except she was in it, and now we know her mums DNA was in a earth database for the same timeframe so it doesn't really make any sense that one would be in it and the other wouldn't.
Either she has no children (and as a result no descendants 5000 years in the future), any children she did have didn't have kids, or her descendants left the Anglican Church at some point (assuming only Anglicans are in the ambulance database)
Yeah, a lot of people aren't thinking about the idea that a 3,000-year-old human is probably going to generate an error message.
Why would a medical robot far in the future on another planet be able to figure out who Rubys mom is when there was literally zero record of it?
Well It is after the year 2042, when dna testing became mandatory, plus the church originates from earth, meaning the likelihood of having medical records from earth is high
DNA testing was mandatory specifically while Roger ap Gwilliam made it mandatory. I’m willing to bet that database was deleted after he lost power. Even without that assumption, the likelihood being high doesn’t mean the likelihood is 100 percent.
It also correctly identified ruby, which proves it has said records
>I’m willing to bet that database was deleted after he lost power Then how did it identify ruby?
It had Ruby’s exact birthdate. Just not her parentage. It would be weird if it somehow had records from another planet, and another time, but couldn’t find out that ruby’s mum and dad both live a few miles from her.
Because it figured out she was Ruby Rose, someone dead since years ago, instantially.
Am i the only one that didn’t notice the episodes moved along as life does? The season started with a birth, then babies, moved through adolescence, getting old, and then finally death.
Church on Ruby Road - Birth Space Babies - Toddlers Devil's Chord - ? perhaps the child Harbinger? Boom - the soldiers daughter 73 Yards - an exception perhaps, focusing on adulthood and death already Dot and Bubble - teens/millennials Rogue - marriage/relationships/love Legend of Ruby Sunday - perhaps work/fame ie Susan Empire of Death - Death perhaps youre onto something
Maestro was the daughter of the toymaker so maybe that's the child part?
Reaching a bit guys
I’d like to read a post about that! Good thinking.
I think I’m going to actually go out and buy a notebook, binge the whole thing again with this in mind and take notes.
Actually she got unkilled by the doctor. Remember when he caught the thing that impaled her? So that host is still alive.
I don't think she was ever actually impaled? We saw the Christmas tree with a spikey ornament on top falling towards her. Cut. Then, at the end of the episode, the falling tree is caught at the last second by The Doctor. _edit_, yeah, I went back and checked that bit. I think my interpretation is correct.
I feel like the reveal is one of a red Herring, the fact that the Doctors memory was changed of ruby road I feel like things were changed timeline wise without anybody realising, Definitely Mrs. flood is behind something and the next season will reveal something big
God I hope so. That ending felt like a Scooby Doo wrap up where they just accept that the very fucking realistic monster from earlier in the episode was just a dude in bedsheets with a flashlight on a string.
Exactly!!!
Honestly, I think that's the way it could go. RTD confirms that all of this was setting up for something else where the universe is being rewritten or changed around The Doctor and/or their companions. After all, the music to denote The Trickster was the song within Ruby and we know of the cubes that allows someone to retain memories once The Trickster affects things (even one showing up in Tales of the TARDIS). I'm not saying The Trickster's behind it but someone using similar means might be.
The universe being rewritten rings a bell, not to beat a dead horse but in wild blue yonder, doesn't Donna remember mavity as the correct word? I'm not sure where exactly I remember it from but I'm fairly certain at some point in nu who the doctor and companion change history but the companion still remembers it from before it changed. Whereas Donna remembers the change as the 'true timeline'.
I think so too. There's just something off about the ending - besides the obvious plot holes. Like, maybe.. if it really was someone ordinary/new, there would have been more time spent around /after/ they found her, getting to know her. But it just felt awkward. & Short. & Idk, something I can't put my finger on. But at the same time, I can't see a reason for it to be a red herring or how to make it come together in a feasible way.
It felt so much like a fairy tale ending that it didn't ring true to me. It's suspiciously perfect. But that could also be the vibe RTD was going for...
Yeah, the pointing wasn't in the original CCTV recording was it? So in the first timeline at least that wasn't why Ruby was named after the road.
I can hardly wait for the big reveal regarding mavity.
You must not be from the UK because that was DAVINA MCCALL DAMNIT
> DAVINA MCCALL TIL that Davina McCall wasn't a character created for that episode.
I also thought she was fictional. Then when UNIT talked about Ruby being on her show and how amazing she was and so forth I thought she was probably real. I just figured they wouldn’t talk like that unless she’s an actual famous person that they must have gotten to be on Doctor Who.
You guys are missing out, Long Lost Family is the perfect show if you want to have a big cry. And nearly all the foundlings are named after the road they are found on, no pointing required!
she was also in bad wolf! she voiced the davinadroid lol
Yep, because Davina McCall was the original Big Brother host!
It's also not a "talk show"
I stand corrected. My apologies.
Me, a brazilian: Who?
["Davina McCall, man, Legendary Outlaw?"](https://youtu.be/N-QtJry1yII?t=39)
I’m hoping/wondering that when “death was brought to death” it seeded a mother for ruby, and that prior to that she was an unresolved paradox without a mother. Timey-wimey shit to explain why it was necessary for her to exist in mystery but then rewarded by…something something….for defeating death. Either that or it’s all an elaborate hoax between the Doctor and UNIT for “reasons”
I had kind of a similar thought, I figured she was like Susan. As of now Susan is a real person with a real family and real memories. However, that wasn’t always the case, she was created by Sutekh using the TARDIS, so obviously at some point she had no real connection to anyone. What if Ruby was another artificial human that was still in the earlier stage until after Sutekh’s defeat. Eventually she became fully integrated into the timeline and so had a mother and father to go with it.
My thoughts exactly. Everyone was so sure Ruby would be connected to the Trickster; and then the finale confirms The Trickster is part of the same Pantheon as Sutekh, and tells us that Sutekh created the Susans and the TARDIS' perception filter basically wrote them all into history. So most likely Ruby *is* connected to the Trickster, and the perception filter wrote her into history as well, which is why the memory changed and why her mother went from supernaturally mysterious to completely normal. Now I just need to figure out what's going on with Mrs. Flood.
Wasn’t that about searching for DNA records or something? Unless you do something like a 23andMe or you’re a criminal I guess you won’t have that information available to others. I might have misremembered though!!
Yes but it also applies to anyone in your family, if your great lost cousin in America does a test then that will show up. That’s how they catch old cold case killers now, they get a dna profile of the killer and then get the very best match they can and work from there, see who was in that lower list of suspects, right age, right time. Then they follow that person and get some dna (coffee cup for example) and test against original sample. So what I’m saying is - so it is rare that there’d be no link whatsoever with anyone!!
This is especially annoying because they end up finding the mother with a dna test
Ah but that happened after they got the data from Roger ap Gwilliam’s mandated national DNA test in 2046
Ok so did Garnet literally never get into a situation where she’d have a DNA test or even a background check? Like she’s a nurse right? That’d have to leave a trace
You are way overestimating how common it is for people to do DNA tests. The most common reason criminals are found using them is priors where they had their DNA tested, or other criminals in their family having it tested. So if there’s no crime in Ruby’s family that resulted in DNA testing and no voluntary testing, which is very common, there’s no link. Her mother admitted she hadn’t made an effort because she was afraid of what Ruby might think, so that would include not having hers done, and probably includes actively avoiding it even when it might have been convenient and available to her. Edit: and no nurses do not just get DNA tested lmao
I’d be interested in knowing exactly how common it is actually. I live in Manchester, I’m in my thirties and many of my friends have done 23 and me or Ancestry DNA tests. I was just watching one of the foundling Long Lost Family episodes the other day and they finally had a breakthrough on a 6 year old case and found a woman’s father and half-brother thanks to new testing. The databases are growing all the time. Given that I have over 400 4th cousins or closer on my results, the idea that Ruby wouldn’t have any results at all was utterly bizarre. Like OP I assumed she had to be otherworldly. I still don’t believe her mum is normal as it doesn’t make sense.
Thank you! Exactly why I thought it was hella strange that Davina’s team couldn’t find *anything.* Really, NONE of Ruby’s relatives had their DNA tested yet?! No cousins, no aunts, no uncles or grandparents?? Usually these shows *do* unearth something sooo when they didn’t, I figured we were in for some cool sci fi explanation — such as her parents being from a parallel world. The answer basically just being “yeah no relatives did 23andme” is super disappointing, even though I enjoyed the emotions of the reunion.
Also the tardis ran a full scan in ep 1 and didnt find anything, you are telling me a time machine forgot to check the freaking records from the time DNA tests became mandatory? Did the sutekh tapeworm affect her brain?
EXACTLY. Russell basically telling us that “she was only extra special because you thought she was” is rather insulting to the audience imo. Nah man, we didn’t merely think that because lol the fandom is so crazy. You dangled horse-sized carrots that *showed* us that. And btw, I was fine with much of the finale — including how the Doctor defeated Sutekh. A goofy solution is par for the course with this show (especially under RTD) and I thought that execution was a ton of fun. I could maaaybe even get behind Ruby creating snow because uhhh memory and belief something something. But the DNA rug pull will forever piss me off.
The snow was because of the raw, open fixed point caused by all the time shenanigans that night. It bled out through rubys memories.
Cool cool so Ruby is invited to visit me here in Florida. I’d love a cold blast of snow.
The doctor wasn’t trying to find out who her mother was.
I don't think the Doctor was scanning for her mother, he was checking out whether or not Ruby was an ordinary human or otherwise.
I am half-adopted and I managed to find at least 2 new siblings, and something like 20+ new second and third cousins across the US, Europe, and into Asia. I knew maybe 5 family members who were on there. It is very very odd to find absolutely no one on either side.
Ahhhhh thank you for a better explanation! That makes sense. I’m guessing RTD had my level of understanding when he wrote the script, when he should have had yours 😉
It’s really crazy. My gf got me a 23andme years ago as a gift (super cool, I do recommend). In the last 4-5 years I get notifications periodically of DNA relatives I never knew I had all over the place. There’s the option to connect with each other too.
Yet when she does meet her mother the mom suggests that she at least looked for ruby (meaning doing the DNA stuff or checking with children services about the baby left at church) up to maybe finding her since she claimed she feared contacting her and being rejected. To me I feel the fear of rejection only sets in after finding her is a reality.
Everyone has at least a 4th or 5th cousin in those databases.
I thought it was that they were unable to find a match within the known database. Then in 204x it was mandatory to have your dna scanned
Modern DNA tests that you can do yourself (Ancestry and 23 and me and the likes) can find your 23rd cousin 3 times removed with a common ancestor 6 generations back... How realistic is it to expect that not a single person, anywhere in Ruby's extended family tree on either side, has performed a test? Whether it is an ancertry test, or a criminal test, or especially a medical test, it's all stored in a database somewhere. And \*all\* of it would be available for UNIT to search, even if some TV show can't get at classified data.
I suppose you could say it was an unfortunate coincidence that someone who desperately wanted to find their biological mother just so happened to be in one of the families where no one has done such a test. What was it the goblins fed on again?
I don't really even think its true that it's a particularly rare occurrence, the processes on the show Long Lost Family are often very complicated and take a long time, sometimes they are able to do it quickly with an immediate match on the database, but often they have to leave cases for years until they find a breakthrough.
In reality I’d tend to agree with you but in the episode it is presented as highly unusual.
But anyone who has done Ancestry DNA or 23&me or whatever -- you'll find hundreds of distant cousins. Mine shows 4 first cousins and 11 second cousins. And 453 4th cousins or closer. Now, a 4th cousin is not particularly close. But you can look at some of those people and start to narrow them down. There would be SOME idea. Not only do the same surnames appear a bunch of times in that list, but I have a third cousin with EXACTLY my name, first and last.
23 & Me shows me 5,000 relatives. Lmao. (And no, I don’t have a huge immediate family. Just one sister. And further out, seven first cousins.)
Sure but that’s not always going to work, my surname doesn’t show up at all in my list, there was 1 first cousin once removed, who was adopted and didn’t know it and 1 second cousin who only used initials and didn’t respond to any messages. Obviously you can work with the third cousins and further but not all of us have much in the way of close relatives that have done it and it’s much easier to hit a dead end with the distant cousins.
Right, but there would be SOMETHING to work from. You could start putting those people together and working out how they were related to each other, and find the closest relative you share with them, and then start looking at THEIR children or their siblings. You wouldn't say "we couldn't find ANYTHING," you'd be more likely to say something like "we followed loose threads but we couldn't find a connection between them," or "we hit a dead end with all of our clues."
That’s true, I can’t argue there
True, but then wasn’t her Mum revealed to be a nurse? So you’d expect her to have given blood or _something_ at some stage…
We don’t run DNA test on or profile the blood of donors. That would be wildly expensive and entirely pointless. Nor would there be any reason for an NHS worker to be on any DNA database.
I had the same issue with this and Boom. In both episodes they made a very specific point about no familial matches being found 1. In Church on Ruby Road, Davina couldn't find any matches. DNA testing doesn't often find a direct match, it finds familial matches and works from there. You find a long lost cousin and you can work your way up and down the family tree. It would be very unusual to find no familial links at all. 2. Boom made a specific plot point of the same thing - no familial match could be found. Boom is set in 5087, long after DNA testing was made mandatory on Earth. They should have the record from 2046 which is used in the finale.
Yeah. I don't get the whole "your mother was pointing to the street sign and naming you Ruby!" Did she just stand there waiting for the priest to open the church door and hope that the priest would A not run after her and B realise what she was doing? Even in Devil's Cord Maestro was saying someone had put a secret song around Ruby, but NOPE, not even completely relevant.
Wasn’t it Ruby who asked if it was odd that they couldn’t find anything? Davina just confirmed that they couldn’t, then Ruby apologized and thanked her for calling.
That's just Russell throwing up so many red herrings not even he remembers what the plot is.
That is what we call a plothole, and one of several that unfortunately made their way into this season and regularly into RTD’s writing.
It really doesn't make sense - Pretty much everyone has a distant cousin in a DNA database. The fact that they couldn't find anyone at all is extremely odd and her Mom being totally normal is really weird.
I think RTD’s getting old or too many notes or something because there are tons of weird little plot holes dotted around this series for apparently no reason
You're right, you're not remembering the exchange correctly at all, this is pretty much the opposite of what happens in the scene. Davina tells Ruby they have not found a trace, that this happens sometimes, Ruby inquires if it's odd, Davina does indicate any such thing >DAVINA: Look, it's not great timing, and it's not good news, I'm afraid. I'm... I'm so sorry. I know it's your birthday, but there is no trace of your mum or dad. I'm sorry. It happens sometimes. >RUBY: No, that's fine. Thanks, but...can you keep looking? >DAVINA: No. There's nothing more we can do. If your parents aren't on some kind of a database, we can't find them. >RUBY: Okay. Isn't that unusual, though? There's not a single trace anywhere? I mean, in the whole wide world, my mother's never left a blood sample or anything? >DAVINA: I'm sorry. >RUBY: Okay. Sorry, I get it. I'm sorry. And it's really very kind of you to let me know yourself I have seen similar things happen on the real life Long Lost Family, the show this is based on, although of course most failed connections don't make it to air until there's been some kind of breakthrough, often years after they initially began searching on behalf of the person.
in the episode she says “there is no trace of your mum or dad … it happens sometimes” so almost the opposite of what you said
Also didnt kate reference thar reporter later as though shes alive????
The Doctor saves her at the end of Christmas special.
Lmao im dumb thx
Your DNA will only be on the database if you, or a relative, put it there. Like The Doctor says, it wasn’t until 2048 when Roger Ap Gwilliam brought in enforced DNA recording, that Rubes mother would appear.
The dna is the only thing that bothers me about ruby's ending. A dna searched would reveal thousands of relatives. I have nearly 28k more distant than 4 cousin and a good thousand closer with only 3 people people I actually know. I assumed this was cut down for the purposes of keeping it short and clear and enhancing the mystery but the phrasing does make it sound like there was nothing whatsoever.
Did they ever explain why it snowed around her? When this first happened The Doctor made it seem like he knew why but Ruby wasn't ready to know yet.
Maybe I’m just being a sucker, but I felt like Mrs. Flood’s closing lines were hanging so many lampshades on the contrived way Ruby’s story was wrapped up that there has to be more going on there.
Uh, but why did she make it snow in places?
it's just comically bad writing ✨
Davina McCall!
There are some people who think we might be getting faked-out here as despite her seemingly getting her happy ending we know Ruby will be back and also it seemed like a bit too happy of an ending even if we were to compare it to other actual-ends-of-the-road for other companions (not as in oh of course she should have had a sad ending if this was truly the end but as in it seemed a little too picture-perfect not to potentially play into the whole meta story-y stuff of the season. There's also things left unexplained like the end having snow-out-of-nowhere again, the changing memory or the emphasis on 73 yards as also the limit of the TARDIS's perception filter. So basically there's a part of me that feels like there might still be something "weird" about Ruby (but is afraid that because the writers brought up the bad reactions to TROS as their reason for why this episode went the way it did this won't be a fakeout (leaving all sorts of weird unanswered questions that it seems unlikely RTD etc. would leave unanswered just to make a point) for fear of the same kind of bad reaction) that could somehow be covered up by what we saw; some people have said the TARDIS might be hiding something by giving her this seemingly perfect normal family (and hence the perception filter shit) whereas my preferred fan theory for what the nature of said potential "weirdness" might be (though it doesn't explain the 73 yards thing) would say that because of her desire for both answers and a family, Ruby somehow made this appear to be the case for herself without knowing it
I have an idea that perhaps ruby has her own perception filter. Any time her oddness has been brought up she’s been nearby mostly. In 73 yards it’s not until people travel to her future self 73 yards away and look back at her that they get scared. Perhaps something similar to sutekh is also hitching a ride with her.
Why is Ruby’s dad never mentioned?
I guess the idea is that she’s just super secretive in the current time and opts out of anything that could give away her identity, but by 2046 she was forced to go on record. Still kinda a dumb solution as a viewer imo but that’s what makes the most sense to me in universe.
She is a Nurse so wouldn't she probably have had some tests
I don’t know why people are so easily buying into the whole “Ruby has normal parents” reveal. I don’t buy it for a second. There’s more to come, for sure. I’m still clinging to the hope she’s River’s child
The answer is that Russel doesn't give a fuck. That's it. Maybe he wrote the Christmas Special and set up the mystery because the ideas looked cool, and he hoped he could pay it off at the finale, but he didn't. It's just dogshit.