How Steven Moffat Created The Scariest Doctor Who Monster | Video Essay
Вставка
- Опубліковано 2 чер 2024
- We look back at one of Doctor Who's most iconic monsters: The Weeping Angels.
PATREON ► / fullfatvideos
Facebook: / fullfatvideo
Instagram: / full_fat_videos
Twitter: @FullFatVideos
Watch | Like | Share | Subscribe
Edited by Harry Bagg
All footage used in this video is for educational purposes only.
Hey guys, thanks for watching and leaving your comments. It's great to see so many people praising Moffat and I'll definitely be doing more positive videos on him in the future. We had our very good friend, Harry Bagg, edit this one. Not only did he help lighten our load so we could commit to some longer projects (cough cap essay cough) but he's done a fantastic edit. He's launching his own channel in the coming weeks, why not subscribe now and get ahead of the curve!
IN THE BAGG: ua-cam.com/channels/qPIf74MUZkl-_w72XwA5kg.html
Full Fat Videos That guy sounds like a right loser!
Have you heard of scp becuase there is an scp that is exactly like the weeping angle and was written a few months before that might have also given him inspiration
Full Fat Videos glad to see a positive video about Steven Moffat people get so caught up with him as showrunner they forget how good his individual episodes are
Whoever wrote Capaldi's lines needs to die. Just putting it out there.
So you're telling me that in england kids watch dr.who?
Doctor Who is an absolute gold mine for a game I like to play called "where have I seen this UK actor before".
it's pretty much like Harry Potter, there was barely a D to B-list British actor (& a number of A-listers) ranging from 30 to 60ish years old that wound up not being used somewhere in their productions.
actually I still held out hope til the first Death Hallows Part 1 trailer that Stephen Fry was going to play Xenophilous Lovegood, not only perfect casting I felt but a great nod to Fry having done all of the audiobooks.
I wanna see Jay from the inbetweeners get some weeping angel clunge
@@kaiserkiefer1760 funnyily enough he's in season 12
kenrock56 - Twitch Vods With Chat really! Can you please give me the episode name?
@@kaiserkiefer1760 Orphan 55
I just realized that there were multiple occasions in which the Weeping angels could have succeeded in getting a character, being right behind them...but the only thing keeping them from doing so was the audience observing them.
I’m going to put that under the “Yikes” category and move on.
That's really cool and really creepy. The realization behind it is amazing!
you got to contain them fuckers and pit them against scp 173
Dr. Bright making a comment on a possible idea giver for scp 173.
The empty child fucking shook me up “are you my mummy “
Especially as when I went to bed my dad would sometimes do the thing when they were transforming
Didn't one of the angels come out of a recording for Amy...?
Hmmmmmmm... have a good night :)
"I died afraid and alone and in pain" is such a brilliant line.
@@KillMePete I love this show but Netflix only has till season 10 the ending has broke me and we'll I'm left on a cliff hanger when I know more seasons are out but just out of my grasp of money... 😔
@@KillMePete the only more worse thing for then bills death is amys😔
@@KillMePete I think both lines speak to what the Doctor as a character fears most which is that the people around him suffer for his hubris, and that he is unable to save them.
If you were an immortal 900 year-old would everyone not feel like a child to you and what adult could bear to think that either sentiment was the last though of their child.
See also: The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances.
@@localjuicebox9026 and your fucking grammar dude holy shit
moffat's run had some killer lines
Me, as the big-brained 7-yr-old that I was: "Just wink and swap eyes when that eye gets tired."
I don’t understand why they didn’t do that. I’ve never watched Dr Who so maybe I’m missing something, curiosity brought me here lol
@@matthewduncan8523
It take a conscious effort to keep winking, blinking is autonomic. There is also the fact that even if you make an effort to keep winking at some point you are going to close both eyes.
@@lilchristuten7568 Tbh I think their ability to fuck with lights might be more of an issue than systematic blinking.
@@presidentialflourish
They can't really mess with the lights during the day but yeah that would be a bigger problem considering they can still do it while they are stone.
That's used, but eventually it'll fail and you'll take your eyes off it for a split second. Consciously try it - you may be able to keep it up for ten, fifteen minutes. Maybe. But eventually, you'll blink, and it'll come.
You missed my favorite terrifying bit about the weeping angels (at least, until their return which sorta ruined it...)
In 'Don't Blink' the angels pop up right behind people several times when they leave and then just... stop. Definitely a point at which they could've killed them, but instead they just froze there.
And the reason they did is because the viewer can see them there, behind the characters. It's a great minor 4th wall break that usually doesn't get noticed until a second or third viewing, and ups their terror factor to me in a unique and weird as hell way.
That is crazy and that could be the intention and that is kinda why it would have been a bit better for them to not show them moving but it was an interesting choice and was kinda cool. It did make them less scary by seeing that
Thanks for pointing that out and making it even more terrifying
r/tihi
It's the viewer's ability to halt the angels because we can see them that ruins the later episodes with them.
It is established they can't move if they see each other. So, tell me, how the hell do they gather a whole group of them to all be looking at the doctor for his final speech?
In other words, the weeping angels are the only character in the episode that know we exist. They. Know. We. Exist.
I once walked past a cathedral that had four bronze statues standing outside. I remember standing there thinking “these are beautiful, but something’s off”. Didn’t really think about it until I walked past again an hour later, to find one of the statues missing. Turned out to be the best living statue artist I have ever seen
Oh hell nah,you gotta get it back in blood
You sure?
Cope
I remember when I was younger my parents had this angel statue that sat in the front yard. Wasn't quite weeping angel, but it was very much a eerie thing under the right context.
So when the doctor who episode blink aired, I remember the night afterward driving to their house in the middle of the night to take that statue and move it till it was facing the kitchen window.
The kitchen window is fairly high off the ground. In fact, just high enough that only the eyes and up on the angel are available to be seen...almost like it was peeking in.
I got a call the next day from my dad to come help him move the statue as they were going to sell it.
Delightfully devilish.
That is hilarious
You evil monster
This is what we in the bussiness call
"a win-win scenario"
Absolutely amazing
I had two problems with the weeping angels:
1. When you see them move in 'Flesh and Stone' it breaks the 4th Wall mystery that has been building up the whole time. The Angels never move so long as they are being observed by any living thing. The viewer at home is a living thing as well. That's why the idea that "whatever holds an image of an angel becomes itself an angel" was so terrifying, because your own TV set was holding the image as well. So when you see them move, it breaks that whole 4th Wall mystery. They are just like any other monster, bound to the TV show.
2. They were used too much and so subsequently defeated too much. Take "The Angels Take Manhattan". Too much.
Otherwise, probably the best Moffat contribution to Doctor Who.
Andrew Capone I like to think that the angels moving scene is an effect of filmstrips. How there’s a brief millisecond of blankness between the frames, and THAT was when the angles were moving. But its not long enough for vision to register, giving the angles the illusion os stiff yet fluid moving stone, when in actuality, they’re freezing and unfreezing faster than we can register.
@Andrew Mason
That also explains why they only inches toward Amy, they were moving at full speed, we viewers were just interrupting there movement.
Taking that idea even further it also could be used to explain why they didn’t immediately do anything about Amy, it’s not that they didn’t know how human vision worked, they were really trying to figure out/find what the hell was constantly viewing them and then looking away, before presumably deciding Amy might have something to do with it.
I definitely agree, as it is so eloquently put in this video: ua-cam.com/video/ihnFtV6qK6g/v-deo.html Moffat tried to build on the lore of the Angels, but instead the result of the subsequent 3 episodes were only to not only add illogical lore, but to write over the original as well
They were used too much and so subsequently defeated too much.
please. they got nothing on daleks.
@@LegendPurpleDragon152 I got so excited about this cause nothing Steven Moffat ever did pissed me off more than having the angels move onscreen, but unfortunately it’s contradicted within the narrative in the Amy and the angel recording scene
I cannot even begin to explain how much Blink screwed me up. Soooo many sleepless nights.
I some times see stone hands near doors and then i blink a couple times then its gone. Must be my imagination.
It was Listen that gave me the sleepless nights and fear of the late night toilet visit. Thank fucking god it didnt have a gap under my bed lol
same here man
@@sean.a.s7234 You're delusional
@@pixyl4415 probably
16:20 - no, I disagree with the angels moving on screen being cool. It's a shame if you ask me, because never seeing them move on screen could have been a brilliantly subtle 4th wall break.
We know the angels can't move when they're being observed. So why **shouldn't** that extend to the viewer? It's a minor thing, but I think it would have been more enjoyable to never see them move on screen.
I agree, in the first episode when the doctor explains this mechanism, it's a bit mysterious as to what actually happens when they move, do they remain statues, do they shift into a true form different to how we see them? This is lost the second we see them move. Also I thought they were meant to be ridiculously quick, what's with the cliche slow horror head turn
I'm not sure about it. Perhaps they could've made the angels moved in a classical way , like usual, but in my opinion I don't really mind the scene.
Of course I should respect your opinion :)
Dang i never thought of it like that and I do like them not moving way better. So you always have that sense of mystery about what they even are
Squiffles I thought the same. They look like statues because they literally freeze into rock, there is no reason to assume they would look that way when not observed and I don't think they should. I like the fourth wall breaks because who can watch Blink without trying not to blink yourself? The weeping Angels are brilliant and blink is a masterful short horror story piece that almost completely stands alone (and is a great introductory episode for would be doctor who fans) but they are a diminishing return. Every time they are brought back they are slightly neutered and become less scary.
@@richardbourton4523
Imo the weeping angels are probably the scariest and coolest doctor who creatures!
Tbh it doesnt really make much sense for the episode to show them as it excludes the mystery of their quantum-locked evolution.
I'd prefer it if they made the scene cutting from part to part, showing their heads moving.
2:40 the angels were actually warning us about the disease know as the dab
They truly are a mistaken creature
Someone is an e;r fan
I love how the light coming into the room matches its colour and actually makes look like it's holding its other arm upwards
FUCK NOW I CAN'T UNSEE IT
Tbh seeing them move kinda ruined them in some way, I liked the idea that their true form was some unimaginable being that could do all these seemingly impossible things, but revert back into a mundane Statue form when viewed, like when at the end of Blink where they were tilting and tipping the Tardis around whenever the light flickered off.
I agree. It ruined their mystery imo. I wish I never saw them move.
I wish you had also pointed-out how he set-up the angels defeat at the start of Flesh and Stone.
Amy: So what if the gravity fails?
Doctor: I've thought about that.
Amy: And?
Doctor: And we'll all plunge to our deaths. See? I've thought about it.
It's played-off as little comedy, but it in fact prepares us to accept the change in gravity again once the power is drained.
It's like the Aplan thing from part 1: "Oh you thought that was the Doctor joking about as a throwaway line? Nope, foreshadowing! Pay more attention!"
It's one of the criticisms I don't like about this episode: that the Doctor got lucky and did nothing to defeat the Angels; he clearly _thought about it._
Very nice Chekhov’s gun!
Matt Smith is such a lame wimp, Tennant could kick Matt Smith’s ass.
Elijah Ford exCUSE ME?
+JayDeeJayEssHaitch
I mean the resolution at the end of the two-parter was pretty good, in that it's one of the few Doctor Who resolutions that aren't asspulls and work perfectly within the established rules of the episode, but the Doctor still had no involvement in it. It's just that he knew they'd end up inadvertently killing themselves. If he was never there in the first place, the situation would've solved itself.
I would like this more if it was written so that the Doctor intentionally lured the Angels into a specific location so that, once the gravity fails, they'll fall into the crack, but I guess Moffat didn't really go with that. (Even if we do believe the Doctor did plan it out that way, it'd just be conjecture; it was never stated nor was it even implied.)
Weeping Angels
The Silence
Vashta Nerada
The Empty Child
These are all reasons why Moffat is my favorite writer on the show.
Absolutely great creator writer but not a good show runner. Then it felt like he was constantly telling the audience I am smarter than you over and over again. He needs an editor look at blink compared with the 2 parter.
He was a double edged sword who couldn't make a brilliant omelette without breaking an eggbox
i dont know about the silene ore Vashta Nerada but will check after this HOWEVER look again at the credits, the Angels and the Empty Child were created NOT by Moffat but by Russel T Davies
@@Guardian582 interesting sally sparrow comes from a dr who annual short story written by moffat and has the wallpaper reveal. I don't remember too much more other than the title what I did in the holidays by Sally sparrow.
yes....
“The image of an angel becomes itself an angel”
But Sally had a picture of an angel at the end of Blink, unless that was the angel which sent the Doctor and Martha back
It almost certainly was. And the image couldn't become an Angel because the Angel was now just a statue. So instead of the image of a Weeping Angel it was just a statue. Clever.
@@TheKazragore And how many times has Thr Statue of Liberty been photographed? So that puts the kibosh on that idea.
@@hellacoorinna9995you're assuming that it was photographed while it was an angel. Which seems unlikely considering the time period and you know the paradoxes.
@@hellacoorinna9995 That's one of the reasons "The angels of Manhattan" doesn't work. While it is a shocking reveal to have the Statue of Liberty be an angel at first glance, it just rips up too many continuity errors to be worth it.
8:11 that's horrifying when you consider just how many pictures of the Statue of Liberty there are.
And it’s even worse when you’re a New Yorker and constantly exposed to hundreds of images of the Statue of Liberty in Times Square and other tourist areas every single day lmao
@@cryptnotputtinglastname392 Or it puts the kibosh on it, on account of how daft an idea it is.
Or you know as the other person stated, it's a stupid idea
If this does become a _"Moffat wasn't the devil incarnate, here's his good stuff"_ series, I am all for it. He seems to get the blame for every tiny flaw his era ever had thanks to his actual flaws being so publicised. The balance needs to be restored.
Call me Daddy Thanos because I'm about to tip the scales
Moffat's flaws are overly exaggerated. He's not necessarily a bad writer. It's just that he's clearly better at single episodes than full seasons.
F.u.c.k Go.ogl.e No
@F.u.c.k Go.ogl.e Computer says no. Did you even watch the video? Besides, Chris left because of RTD.
@F.u.c.k Go.ogl.e Dude, you're commenting on every bloody post defending Steven Moffat. End you blinded ignorance and get a fucking life.
The “walk like you can see bit” along with seeing the angels moves makes me so annoyed with that episode. The angels turn to stone when viewed. It’s not that they won’t move if seen, it’s that they can’t. It’s to do with their biology. They would know any couldn’t see them because they could move. They were no longer stone.
Agreed and us never seeing them move prior to that made the whole "An image of an angel is itself an angel" work so well with an excellently well done 4th wall break that made perfect sense for the lore around them. This is a creature with supernatural abilities that by their very nature would break the 4th wall if they existed as they would, in essence, be polypresent for want of a better word existing in all places where their image is in addition to their physical location and thus they literally are in the living room with us because their image is and thus we are part of the story by nature and then they go and ruin it by having them do something they should not be capable of while we are watching.
no its a defence mechanism like if someone went to punch us we would put our arms out to block it but thats not built into us, they choose when to turn to stone or not to protect themselves or inflict harm.
@@braydenjohn3443 Hedgehog curling into a ball would be another good example perhaps a better one as it is similarly something they tend to always do if they perceive a threat even when there would be better responses to the situation you know like be somewhere else pronto if the threat is a car. Seems like the angels would have this issue even being more intelligent I presume they would turn to stone right in front of a high-speed train if one came around the corner despite the fact this thing can turn a statue into rubble with ease.
If an angel turned to stone in front of a high-speed train the train would rapidly become an ex-train, one of the plot points of these episodes is literally that the angels cant be hurt while defending
But I do agree that actually showing it moving was a bad choice
The weeping angels were the scariest things I'd ever seen in my life whenever i was younger. The fact that they were virtually unstoppable, and their fangs shooting out of their faces whenever they're inches away from getting you, essentially displaying the inevitability of your own demise... terrifying.
Yeah, that "move like you can see" and them moving as a stone...
There is only one more thing which irks me in this episode: the angels don't cover their eyes, they see each other... yet it doesn't lock them indefinitely, like it did in Blink
Always thought it could've been the crack that was boosting their already powerful abilities. It was a bit shit but I didn't mind it enough to ruin the show or the angels for me.
The reason that the Weeping Angels are so scary and terrifying because they represent the threat that is only threatening because it is unknown or unseen. Three unknown is either exciting or terrifying and that affects you whether you see it or not
I think the fact that they'll rip your cerebral cortex from your body and use your voice to torment your friends is just a little bit scarier than them just not being known or seen.
@@jonathancampbell5231 i'd rather get sent back in time than get my spine riped out.
Only mark zuckerburg can survive(he doesn't blink)
Yes we all watched the video, you don't have to repeat the main points.
moffat isn’t a bad writer, he’s just a bad director - all his stand alone episodes are some of the best in the series, but when you give him full control of the season, it’s too much
Well I beg to differ. I think his stories for 11 were brilliant, and after he left everything went to sh/t pretty quickly.
I won't pretend like I know anything about directing a series, but as a viewer all I can say is well done. The plots were amazing and progressed with a natural speed throughout the episodes.
I would like to hear your criticism in detail though. What do you think is wrong with his seasons?
He's the George Lucas. Give him too much control, you get the Prequels equivalent of Doctor Who.
Still 1000x better than Chibnall.
@@TracyBeakerMemories Anything is better than Chibnall
The man has his limits which is understandable, it's just that he, himself needs to respect that and set himself his limits.
The bit where the doctor says “don’t turn your back, don’t look away, and don’t blink” is also so scary to me. The quality of the video and the background music omg, maybe I just get scared too easily but that part added to the horrifying nature of the weeping angels
The beauty of their first introduction is their ability to include the audience. We don't see them move on screen, because WE'RE observing them. If they're quantum-locked creatures that can't move under observation, it makes us feel like we're a part of the story when it seems like we're the ones keeping them in place. The TARDIS scene displays this perfectly. Why would they be motionless when the light comes on if no one else is in the room? It's because we're the ones seeing them, and thus, we keep them locked in place until the light goes out again.
The angels CEMENTED their presence.
i pulled a sneaky on ya
People suggesting that Moffat stole the idea from SCP173 seem to forget that while 173 came out a few months before the angels first aired, the angels would have had to be filmed at least half a year before they aired, and be written sometime before that (scripts don't come out of thin air after all), meaning that the Angels came first, although it's possible for two things to be discovered at the same time.
Thank you for saying this.
Honestly, props to the cameraman for getting so close to the weeping angels
16:21 I personally felt that it would've been far more interesting if we don't see them move, feels like there's more tension to them figuring out that she doesn't see. shows that their power isn't limited through their slow movement. Also, I felt that their stone appearance would be more of a disguise and they wouldn't look like that if they moved.
So what he was going for but wasn't executed well was the whole, we the viewer are stopping them, which is why several times they stop behind people, because they don't see the angel but we do. And them moving wasn't movement, it was them quickly moving inbetween frames, since film is just 24 photos a second. And they move so fast it causes them to look like they're moving in slow motion but really they are moving in between our views of them on the TV.
I like it in concept but it's execution was poor
When I was young, Blink scared me so much it wasn’t for about another 3 or 4 years that I was able to rewatch it. I actually knew people who had Blink banned in their house because it was so scary.
I never really liked Time of Angels because when I saw it I was disappointed because they weren’t as scary as I remembered (but I think this was just me being older). Seeing this I think I appreciate it more now.
Ghost196311 Goodness gracious though, THAT SOUNDTRACK! The Time of Angels might just be the most atmospheric, creepy as all get-out, and generally best piece of music Murray Gold ever made for Doctor Who!
I remember watching Blink as a kid and it fucked me up for years. I couldn't rewatch it, when the Weeping Angels came back I could barely watch it and I had lots of nightmares about them. Then I stopped watching Doctor Who for several years and came back to it a year or so ago. When we came to Blink I found that it actually wasn't that scary.
It's so surreal, going back and watching the things that terrified you as a kid when you're an adult and not being bothered by it.
Lol yeah between that and The Waters of Mars, many sleepless nights
When I was little, I first watched Blink in November. That Christmas, I didn’t want to put angels on the tree because I didn’t want everyone to die 😅
I saw Blink as an adult, and especially the first time, it was one of the scariest things I had seen on TV, almost on par with Alien or Aliens. No gore, no high dollar effects, and yet truly terrifying.
A mark of a good show is redefining reality... and making me do a double or triple take every time I pass one of these statues is brilliant.
Having met Steven Moffat, I can soundly say that he's a lovely man and put his heart into Dr Who for his run.
that's sweet
Having met Steven Moffat, I can soundly say that he is currently commiting grand theft auto and smoking crack while I am currently stuck in the trunk of the car.
Felix The Trap nice
one of my favorite facts is that the Angel's ability to turn into stone was described as a survival reflex they didn't have control of. Begs the question, "What scares the Angels?"
Probably something higher in the planes. Doctor Tennant described the angels as beings of abstract.
They probably fear the abstract.
@@xanmontes8715Kronus the Chronovore, 3rd Doctor hazard. They are made of a lattice of non-baryonic matter so have no physical reality to us. But feed on a time energy of lost possibilities in their higher plane the Six-fold-realm they can subsist on the background energy, but cross into dying realities where time is a thing to feed. The Angels in their stone state would be immune to the Chronovores which can't affect physical matter directly.
The weeping angels saying "comfy chairs" was the best part.
Fight me.
"I made him say 'comfy chairs'."
That scene still makes me laugh lol
2:39 I'm gonna mention that angel is dabbing before anyone else does
hahahha lol
ME: Has never seen a second episode of Doctor Who ever
ALSO ME: *click*
Series 5 with Matt Smith is the perfect place to start. x
Or series 3, it's widely held to contain one of the best 3-4 episode runs in the shows history and personally I think Martha is amomg the best companions
I would recommend starting with Christopher eccleston personally because it was the start of new who and you get to know the world of doctor who along with Rose. Also, the empty child is my favorite episode so I'm a little biased
I would only recommend series 5 as a starting point because it is quite well contained and the episodes appeal more to a global audience compared to series 1 or 3
Also if you're in the UK all of the modern episodes are on iPlayer so it's really easy to get hold of
The weeping angels are the reason i refused to watch the show when i was a kid lol
I have a phobia of statues because of this so I am going to get off this video now
It was the zygones for me when I was a kid
For me I started to watch the 9th doctor and the minute I saw the empty child I got put off for a whole year
Same here...i randomly stumbled upon the first episode they appear and said "no thanks"
I really hated being able to see the angel move. I think part of their mystery was the unknown that surrounded them, and seeing them move robbed them of that, especially because they moved so slowly and looked the exact same as they did when frozen.
The Midnight creature was the scariest Who monster in my opinion. The fact we never see it yet get complete understanding of its malice and power is terrifying. It would have beaten the Doctor if it didn't get so confident in its power.
I remember that episode, one of the few episodes of TV or horror to really stick with me, it was a wonderfully done monster,
I loved how it played off of the idea of a creature learning, understanding its victims by learning from and taking control of them.
Showing off how terrifying it is for something to adapt to the unknown and new information so quickly
Mr Sandman... Bring me a dream... Make him the cutest, that I've ever seen... Kgggt
Blink may have been more classically terrifying, but Midnight left me with just as many sleepless nights. The way the people there reacted to the situation was just so... well, human. Made me wonder who the real monsters were.
Still one of my favorite episodes of all time.
WARNING: I ramble. A lot.
I completely agree, if we're talking about main episode antagonists. There's also the fact that we know it's probably still out there, considering the fact that it survived Midnight all its life. All the humans really did was send it back home. Personally, though, I think The Waters of Mars is the scariest episode, even more than Midnight (again, personal opinion). The Flood is scary, yes, but we also see the Doctor. The Doctor, when he's broken, and afraid, and there's no one to hold him back. In a way, the Doctor could be the scariest thing in the entire show - and many people agree that he indeed is. A supposedly 'good man', pushed to the limit and finally snapping... to me, that's so much scarier than something you never understand. Because you understand him. You understand what he's endured, what he's lost, what made him turn around. And it cost a life for the Time Lord Victorious to finally realise what the hell he had become.
But that's just me! Please don't fight me! *cowers under table*
That whole episode was crazy and very intense
2:39 is that angel hitting the dab?
🤣🤣🤣🤣✔💯💯💯💯👌👌👌👌👌
The dabbing angel.
Hipster weeping angel. He did it in 2007 before it was cool
I know I did a double take when I saw it!!!!!!! 😭
Wow thats so *E P I C*
Fun fact: Steven has weeping angel statues in his garden, or at least he used to.
How do I know? I’ve seen them
Madlad!
Of course, no idea of this is real or fake, but if it is, still!
What do you mean he used to?
@@Acdxlsmaybe sold them out of paranoia,or just..didn’t want them anymore
@@s0livagant_ and how do you know they didn’t leave when he wasn’t looking?
Seeing the angels move was incredibly annoying, because in Blink we were told they were only statues when observed. Other than that, I really liked this story.
That "walk like you can see" bit so dum. But the rest was so good
It's not though. The communication device thing Amy was holding could sense the angels.
Headcanon: the doctor from the big bang was looking at the angles
@@kiss_fish they can turn electronics off and were moving during the scene
My brother in law freaked out when we saw the Angels move haha
@@kiss_fish I was thinking about that and I think that's the only possible reason as to why the angels would assume she could see them. That scene was pretty damn good once the plot oversight has been solved.
Moffat was a hell of an episode writer. I've never denied that. He was just crap at season-long arc planning and long-term character development. Let him come up with a one-off idea with a well-defined character and he comes up with The Girl in the Fireplace, Blink, and The Silence in the Library. Ask him to plot a season and it's rushed or ham-fisted and forced throughout and he starts falling back on and over-using his one-off creations until their long in the tooth and boring.
You know what, looking back on some of the earlier stuff, I realise that he's also really good at writing horror. Silence in the Library and Blink had me shitting myself for years when I first saw them.
Yeah i agree but i still think series 5 was still really good
NekoMouser he was great at writing arcs and character development!
@@prof.evilpictures8696 We'll agree to disagree.
I agree completely. Blink and Silence in the Library are 2 of my fave Dr Who's but when Moffat became the director his work went to shit. Which is a shame
It seems to me the Weeping Angels are based (not exclusively, of course) on grief, how it empties the present and future, keeps you returning to the past. Being sent back in time (living with loss) isn't particularly traumatic once adjusted to, but the dislocated life is somehow less than the original would otherwise have been.
I like that theorie👍🏼
I went and re-watched 'Blink' after watching this video, it still gives me the shivers and remains one of my favourite Doctor Who episodes.
With Moffat being overly-criticized near the end of his run, I think we'll probably start to see history repeat itself again and Moffat's positives will be viewed more widely again now that Chibnall has had his first season.
It was the same with Russell T. Davies when, by the time he was nearing his run, many fans were begging him to leave and acting like he was the devil incarnate. Moffat took over and was met with lots of positives before things started going downhill.
I don't think the same thing will happen to Chris Chibnall though. Unlike Davies and Moffat, Chibnall's first season has not been met with a lot of positive reception.
Na most of his episodes are hot shit
The only way for chinball is up
I think Moffat is actually a very creative writer, but Davis is a better show runner. Moffat's run really shows that it requires a completely different skill set to run a show.
The new series kept making many mistakes and dumb shit but it was still good, it felt like doctor who, had good stories, acting and sometimes, mostly during series 1 - 5 had great writing, though series 11 from the get go had lost all of that instantly and was just undeniably awful and nothing like doctor who, with no good writing or even good acting (aside from three or four side characters and one of the companions)
@@TheRealUnkn0wn_289 'undeniably awful' except for all the people who readily deny it. Don't speak for other people.
Moffat is nowhere near as bad as people seem to think
Yes!
I actually think he's the best we've had. Better than RTD, absolutely.
coladict you take that back!
Defo better than RTD. And much better than what we have now.
Problem with Moffat is he tried so much it just kind of got away from him. He went too big. Series 5 was bloody brilliant though. After I started watching Doctor Who towards the end of S3 it was Smith's first couple of season that I really loved.
He's done some brilliant writing in the past, but lately his writing has become extremely lazy and irritating. Huge plotholes and an obvious "I know this doesn't really make sense but just go with this anyway" attitude.
Season 5 was amazing though.
The weeping angels were what got me into Doctor Who. I have a little angel statuette in my room, which I swear moves around sometimes. I told a Whovian friend about it years ago and he immediately said it was a weeping angel. I thought they sounded cool so I watched the series. As I've been writing this comment, it actually occurred to me that I genuinely have no idea where that statuette is right now, so I think I'm going to go look for it so I don't have nightmares tonight.
Did you find it?
Ah, I remember the days when we thought Steven Moffat was bad, and now we have Chris Chiball...can we go back?
I was with you until you talked about the angels moving being cool. That was a poor choice that damaged the creepiness and mystery of the angels
I thought they *turned* to stone when you looked at them.
Like Medusa......
@@roejogan8683 That's exactly it. They turn into stone and can't move when seen. That's what the OG meant, that they ruined their desing
I respectfully disagree, sir. Seeing them move in that grindy, slightly jerky way where it's almost tediously slow only improves the creepiness when you factor one thing into consideration: Framerate.
You aren't seeing the angels move. You're seeing the results of the angels moving in between the frames of the video recording. 24-or-so frames/still images per second only gives them so much time to move before being frozen again by the next frame exposure.
They still only move while we can't see them, but because an in-universe character isn't also looking at them at the same time, they are free to abuse the mechanical limitations of cameras.
@@Voldine2
1 they are looking at each other and we know that them looking at each other causes them to turn to stone.
2 the whole "framerate" explanation is only applicable if the intention is that their exsistance breaks the 4th wall.
1:14 ...is nobody concerned about this bit? Hell, is nobody even curious? I _really_ want to know what was going on with this real-life statue
Same
Some things are best left unknown for the better
He made it up, what else?
@@oliverholm3973 Or he ripped off SCP 173, who knows?
@@jamesstewart7784
It's not a ripoff if it's better ;)
In my school there's a dim corridor with many posters (genius idea already) and the biggest Poster shows a metallic Angel, reaching out to something.
It looks EXACTLY like Moffat's creation, and I always keep my eyes glued on it when I pass through
cramer floro no offense but I’m glad I don’t go to your school
Can you show the poster?
@alonelyassassin4704 an image of an angel becomes an angel. Not a good idea...
I was 6 years old when “blink” aired and I was terrified. I’m turning 20 in April and I’m still too scared to look at statues.
Alfie Bean that’s what I meant
"the angels have the phonebox. I've got that on a t-shirt."
Makes me laugh Everytime! 🤣
The funny part is that it would make a fucking great T shirt
I actually loved (and was scared by) the Weeping Angels in "Blink" but I did not like the two-parter because of all the extra powers they added. I loved that we never saw them moving (and that the audience in Blink was also an observer) but can move incredibly fast and they "killed" people by zapping them to the past. No slow and cheap "horror movie" head turn, no snapping necks.. oh and that image thing. It completely destroyed the mystery and scariness of the Angels for me (and haven't liked them since) but the things you pointed out about the remark about the two heads made by the doctor, the strong supporting cast and the appearance of the crack makes me want to rewatch this nonetheless as I remember I really liked those elements and little twists.
I agree completely. The neck snapping just always ruined it for me. "They're the only psychopath in the universe to kill you nicely... except when they just change their mind apparently."
This is pretty much my position as well. I think there's two factors here, one being an element core to what makes horror engaging for me: that horror monsters break all the rules except their own. The angels had a few rules, no moving when seen, zap you to the past, can see each other, and that was pretty much it. The second factor was the way the angels bent the metafiction with treating the audience as viewers. All of that was broken in the sequel, and of the new powers they're given, the whole image of an angel becomes an angel thing also damages the meta level.
The weeping angels are my favourite doctor who monster by far, and blink is my all time favourite episode! Thank you for this epic breakdown!
Hmmm, you have a typo. In your title you said "the scariest doctor who monster" instead of "the scariest monster ever"
You know what's a truly amazing episode? Heaven Sent. It shows off what's amazing about not only the twelfth Doctor but also about Steven Moffet. It's awesome and the monster was terrifying.
Heaven Sent is probably the most boring and dreadful episode to ever exist. No wonder the show is in the dreadful state it is now
My man, a video on the genius of heaven sent is coming
@@justsomerandomguyonline1144 Love how you just find a video about doctor who then cast disparingly remarks about random episodes
@@booradley8895 I see them everywhere, and it's just so sad.
@@booradley8895 i mean, he wasn't the one who brought the episode up.
I love how Steven Moffet got a metric ton of hate, yet now that he's gone you can really see that he was actually quite good of a match for doctor who compared to whoever wrote the abomination that was season 11, yeah he had mishaps, he's a human, at least he is able to create iconic characters, enemies and most importantly stories.
I truly hope that this docterwholess year means we get a quality series next year, I couldn't watch season 11 to the end, I got so bored of the inconsistencies, bland character development and forgettable enemies.
Literally one of the s11 episodes was like: Stereotypes bad
1. Arrive sometime.
2. Discover aliens.
3. Aliens bad because they hunt, also they were seen near a body.
4. Break into their ship.
5. Actually the whole species has changed irreversibly for no apparent reason and now they pray for dead guys or smth.
3,5. Also they had plenty of chances to clear up their motives but stayed silent and ominous even tho they were being actively accused.
Basically stereotypes bad, cos an entire species can uniformly change forcing you to think another one up. Not like they could totally be a small group defying the main characteristic of this species, because then the actual concept of a stereotype could be logically proven wrong.
Chibnall literally failed to convey such a simple message that it looks more like a draft and less like a finished script, and I feel like the writing hasn't recovered much since that season :(
Season 11 was just barely good enough to get me into the rest of Doctor Who. Immediately after watching the rest, I realised that a microwave meal had introduced me to gourmet food.
Moffat is great for individual episodes but when he gets control of a series he has a really bad tendency to create stupidly elaborate season long plots that go nowhere and never get resolved in a satisfying manner.
Ever since I watched the first weeping angels episode I could never walk past a statue without staring at it until it’s out of view, and getting the chills.
😧
@Pure strangeness wow that’s so creepy!
I do quite opposite I close my eyes for some seconds and open to see they moved or not
One time my cousin moved a statue and I screeched and ran away
I really miss the overarching stories in DW. That was my favourite part of RTD and Moffat's runs, trying to piece together the clues throughout the series to find the underlying mystery
Just judging from your excitement you should really do a season 5 overview of DW 😊
alexyew17 oh it is defo on its way :)
@@FullFatVideos potato i'll donate half a single penny
Agreed! :)
Doctor who: we created the most scariest creature
SCP-173: am i a joke to you?
When you came out 5 months before weeping angels but get none of the recognition.
SCP-173: *Sad stone scraping noises*
Ok so we know that the guy who made 173 made the angles too, so we Have to find him
@@jokesterlego6108 But the original 4chan thread of SCP-173 was made on the 22 of june 2007 while "Blink" (the episode which the weeping angels were introduced in) predates that by thirteen days and not to mention the time it took to actually write the script for the episode.
I'm not saying that Moto42 (the creator of SCP-173) copied the Doctor Who episode but it's kind of hard not seeing the connection between them and the timeframe in which they both got posted.
Source: lostmediawiki.com/SCP-173_(found_4chan_post;_2007) , archive.fo/QD9UF (You can even see that another person made the connection to the Doctor Who episode in the original thread)
@@happydoggo3207 yea
Scp-173 has always been too ugly for me to fear
Let me just say, when I was about 8/9, my brother decided that the weeping angels would be a great way to introduce me to the doctor who series.
Lmaooo blink was my first doctor who episode and I was 4....
misanthropic-rose We can be traumatised together lol
me but with my Dad. He knew damn well about the psychological horror it'll give to an 11 year old boy. But night terrors really took the crown on giving me nightmares
Bruh I’m 10 and I love the weeping angels episodes I was only scared at the first bit cuz I never seen them and I was told it was scary but it’s not it’s actually very good episode not scary tho
The Silence had a bit of a scary vibe too. The whole "monster you can't remember so you have to make a pen mark on your skin, then suddenly you've got several marks...then just as suddenly you're covered in marks. That's creepy.
Also wondered why Amy didn't keep that pic of the Silence on her phone, would have be an even more powerful weapon than the psychic paper. Actually, come to think of it, such a pic would be exactly like the M.I.B. neuralizer.
I'm not ashamed to say that I sometimes have nightmares involving these creepy statues. If that's not a sign that a villain is suitably terrifying then I don't know what is
SCP-173
@@dansaunders1655 I personally find the weeping angels to be a little bit more creepy. There are multiple of them and any statue could be a weeping angel.
@@raygunner8643 Also something representing itself as an icon usually considered to be good, safe, a common icon, and also having that icon appear in a vulnerable state, and not so definitely strange looking (Like 173) subconsciously adds to the horror aspect because it makes us unable to trust our surroundings
People always talk about how Blink is the scariest episode, but no one talks about the episode "Midnight".
That one honestly creeped me out way more.
In my view, there is one glaring mistake in Steven Moffat's "Flesh and Stone" episode, something that I never understood … and it's this: in ‘Blink’ it was established, that the weeping angels - just like in quantum mechanics, where a superposition of quantum states can only exist until observed - can only move when they're unobserved.
But unobserved not only by other (conscious?) beings, but also among themselves¹ - a rule that David Tennant's tenth doctor put to good use when the TARDISes departure locks the surrounding circle of (four) angels in eternal motionlessness.
With the number of angels casually moving about in "Flesh and Stone", one should think that they would surely prevent themselves from ever moving at all, thus posing no threat (whatsoever) …
(Now, I know it's just science fiction, but if you introduce „quantum-locked humanoids“, then why not even try to take such simple things into account?)
Also, in agreement with many commentators before me, I would also like to say that showing the angels in movement was a bad choice and a mistake!
¹ Or, as the Doctor Who Wiki puts it: "their unique nature necessitated that they often covered their faces with their hands to prevent trapping each other in petrified form for eternity by looking at one another."
I love the Moffat/Matt Smith era. It’s my favorite period.
The "walk like you can see" thing was a desperate last-ditch attempt to buy Amy just a little more time and it worked. It was never meant to be the angels' weakness.
Moffat made some bad episodes so that the good-bad episode ration would be perfectly balanced, as all things should be.
The Weeping Angels were the most terrifying antagonists of New Who but they got less and less scary with each appearance.
The problem I have with ToA/FaS is that it removes my favorite part of the Angels, the fact that they turn to stone from being observed. Its not presented as a conscious decision in Blink, if they are being seen they are stone. It adds this cool, sciencey quantum mechanics angle (in quantum mechanics, the act of measuring/observing a wave can cause it to behave like a particle essentially. I'm not a science guy, but I think that's the gist) to a very fantastical monster, which I think is Dr. Who's greatest strength. Using odd scientific concepts with a fantasy twist. Its literally the entire reason the ending of Blink works at all. ToA/FaS completely throws that out the window by making it so that Angels observing each other doesn't trigger their statue state (which retroactively makes Blink's ending make no sense). Amy's "walk like you can see" just further ruins that for me, because by the established rules the fact that the Angels can move *at all* means that she can't see them. Setting aside the ridiculousness that the Angels, which are humanoid and, again as established in Blink, see from their eyes, wouldn't know how human sight works.
While this two-parter is definitely a fun watch and is far from the worst episode Moffat produced, its really emblematic of his shortcomings as a long-form storyteller. He loves to escalate and do "cool" stuff for the sake of being cool, with no mind for the internal consistency of the story. In a vacuum, his ideas can be great. As part of a greater whole, they come off as poorly thought out and sensationalist. Its pretty obvious across his entire body of work (looking at you Jekyll.) He starts off strong, with clever writing and cool concepts. Then eventually undermines himself and loses sight of what made the early stuff good for the sake of spectacle.
At least ToA/FaS isn't The Angels Take Manhattan though. Angel Statue of Liberty is what finally killed Dr. Who for me. There's so much in that episode that should be good, but Moffat's weaknesses are so prominent that it pretty much ruined the series for me.
SCP Foundation: *"Allow us to introduce ourselves."*
Ah yes, peanut
Funny how two huge Hollywood stars who have been in iconic film roles not only pretty much started their careers on Doctor Who but also in the same year 2007. Carey Mulligan and Andrew Garfield. Also THE WEEPING ANGELS ARE AND REMAIN TO THIS DAY CREEP AF AND THEY NEED TO BURN IN THE PITS OF HELL
yeah! seems weird watching them back nowadays on the show...
@@FullFatVideos it is just one thing that always sticks in my mind from series three. i mean this was 2007 it was 12 years ago but in that time Carey and Andrew have gone on to be huge movie stars i mean come on Andrew Garfield was Spiderman before they hired a 15 year old (not really but Tom Holland looks like a teenager). those two can say they owe their careers to Doctor Who.
@@lucypreece7581 you were pretty close, Holland was 16 when they hired him.
@@btetirick he's 22 I think. Meaning he would have been like 19 or 20 when they hired him.
@@lucypreece7581 no, he was specifically 16 at the TIME of hiring. It's just that there was a gap between hiring, and when he debuted as Spiderman.
The way to beat the angels: blink one eye at a time
After like two minutes it becomes almost impossible
I think the "walk like you can see" is fooling the angels to think that Amy that she's already a angel but when they realize she isn't there still curious so they go slow still think that it's there ally.
Scp - 173: Made of cement and stone.
Weeping angels: Made of cement and/or stone.
Scp - 173: Impossibly strong.
Weeping angels: Impossibly strong.
Scp - 173: Can only move when not in vision of living creatues.
Weeping angels: Can only move when not in vision of living creatues.
The weeping Angel's are actually living things, they turn into stone in order to be protected from attacks when being observed
They pretty much quantum lock meaning that the moment they're being observed, they immediately "dont exist"
@@heimdallr2709 the concept itself wasn't extremely original at the time, if you delve into the SCP Universe you will see that SCP 173 is an extra dimensional being existing in every single reality at once, sure, they played with what would happen if they where seen but Weeping Angels Blink episode was aired in June 2007, while SCP was made in March 2007, they had multiple months to at least make deeper differences that made them more original.
RedJaeger
lostmediawiki.com/SCP-173_(found_4chan_post;_2007)
You are wrong. 173 was written 22 of June, 2007.
RedJaeger Blink was already being recorded in November of 2006.
But can the weeping angels shit?
Personally I think Moffat has created some of the best overall story lines as well as stand-alone episodes in Doctor Who, and to only focus on his flaws would definitely be throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I would love to hear a S5 overview from you
Throwing out the baby with the bathwater?
dont blink was perfection itself. you can't go up when your base is perfection.
I just realized... couldn’t they have blinked one eye at a time in blink, so they could still see the angels
Amy Pond did that
Proud that he’s my uncle 💕
Beg him to come back, then....LOL!
I wish he came back.. I miss him :(
Tell your uncle hes an amazing writer and has got a really creative mind
Isla Moffat seriously! I’ve watched doctor who all my life and have never not loved an episode.
Why you begging it in yt comments loll
Omg your uncle is amazing!
fun fact; SCP 173 existed before the weeping angels, leading many people involved in the SCP foundation have the theory that SCP 173 could be the inspiration or a part of the inspiration for the weeping angels
@@tph8267 👐
The Weeping Angels are one of the few creatures which are more inconvenienced by a muzzle flash than they are by a bullet.
The midnight creature and the weeping angels were the scariest DW monsters for me
Personally I'm of the opinion that Moffat was a far better showrunner than people ever gave him credit for. Just like how people complained about RTD until he was gone (at which point he suddenly became some perfect showrunner that the series massively declined from), I think that people will appreciate Moffat more once we get some distance from him.
he was good, till he got his Clara Obsession.
Don't agree. I never got into the Moffat feel of the show after he took over. He had great episodes in his tenure, but the finales really left me uninterested. They got unnecessary messy and complicated.
@@LukasOfTheLight I fully agree with that, he started strong, then had a bit of a low point during seasons 7 and 8, then pulled it together to finish strong.
I'm pretty sure that anyone who is a Dr Who fans wants him back now though....even at his worst, he is still better than what we have now.
Who had this in their recommended?
The weeping angels also inspired the SCP universe, which in turn has also inspired some movies like “Cabin in the woods”
The fact they were set up in an episode where it's a non-doctor story for the majority of the screen time speaks volumes about the quality of the Angels as a concept.
I think personally I never hated a story of Doctor Who under Moffat or Russell T Davies, yeah some arnt as good but a lot of the time in these cases the ideas are really good but not pulled off to the best - never got the hate
The Moffat hate has always baffled me a bit. He is one of the only writers to actually use time travel and paradoxes in a show about time travel (as opposed to just being an excuse to have any setting ever), and even when it didn't work it was never bad.
The only thing I personally disliked about Moffat's tenure is his tendency to make The Doctor the most important being in the universe. I feel like it's the downside of the fanboy in Moffat - the upside being his genuine passion and respect for the lore.
@@midastheunwise2423 If anything, Moffat did that far less than RTD. Hell, S6 was basically all about the dangers of the Doctor being too famous for his own food in the end, and the deconstruction of that mythos.
Case in point - Capaldi's smaller, more character-driven finales. None of them are your average blockbuster, 'Doctor-saves-the-Earth', kind of finale.
James Hampshire I hate shitballs (chris chibnalls) episodes
@@turtleisland1940 before I judge Chibnalls run I will let it finish first cause you never know S12 might be hit after hit
@@turtleisland1940 There have only really been 2 massive stinkers in S11 I think, that being ep 4 and 5. The others have been good to great with probably 2 of the best episodes in the show yet.
Thank you. Just, thank you.
You are very welcome
These angels inspired SCP-173 back in 2007 and, from that, the fictional SCP universe. Frankly,I’m grateful.
The weeping angles inspired the creation of the SCP universe
@MetaPlanet yup, that's why I consider 173 as a deformed angel that was outcasted into Earth.
@MetaPlanet In my opinion, I think that that's actually the reason why 173 snaps necks, thanks to it's deformity it is capable of creating a food source off of the life escense of the many D-Classes it has killed and transforms it into a sort of time source as you just said
(This is just my dumb imagination though, so don't take this too seriously)
@MetaPlanet huh, you may be on to something.
Well, I remember reading something about that SCP-173 was written and posted before the blink episode...
PikariocrafTF 2 the peanut
@@90svroom71 - the HOLY peanut*
PikariocrafTF 2 But, not released
@@insertfunnyname3478 - it was though, on the olde posts within the ancient ruins which is 4chan
@@insertfunnyname3478 vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Thread:734850?useskin=oasis
Blink, the episode featuring Weeping angels was aired in June 2007 while SCP 173 article was posted in March 2007
Fun fact! The story of the also famous SCP-173, that works the same way as a weeping angel, was released before Blink.
(This isn’t saying weeping angels are unoriginal, no, because the episode would’ve had to be written, filmed and edited. But this is kinda interesting how 2 very similar monsters were released around the same time.
Theres one major difference, 173 can move while being watched, he simply does it for a game this doesn't apply to the scps like 096 because 096 is technically blind (and you cant record him) he also will go straight for "cheater" including those who blink one eye at a time,
@@maverickdarkrath4780 That's a tale or theory. Nothing stated in the original post, or the current post on the SCP wiki even implies that.
@@Red-Jaegerwell the archive is from june not march and do u think episodes are just made in a day even if it was from march filming still began in 2006
15:00 I like to refer to that part of his timeline as the "I'm Amy's imaginary friend, but I came anyway!" paradox
(when you're a time traveler, you tend to end up with a lot of paradoxes in your timeline; the universe just works around them)
"It's the same rain," is a line that always gives me chills, and the line my dad was most excited for me to hear when he first showed me the episode
also, when Amy and Rory *died* by the weeping angels, i remember that as a really sad moment
It was also really stupid.
In tru UA-cam comment fashion, I am not going to elaborate.
It’s amazing that any living creature can stop the weeping angels dead in their tracks, including the viewer, because there’s many moments in “Don’t Blink” where no one is viewing the weeping angels bar the camera and they still turn to stone.
The bit where you said he had on his jacket and people complained about for continuity problems and realizing its him from later in the series is the true mind blown thing that forget. Love it for being low key at first but in thhe long run it adds to it.