It ruins the story because Deckard is “our” window into this world, our spirit guide, he represents us at our best and our worst, but he is a broken man, he has lost his humanity bit by bit from retiring replicants until he has become a machine himself.

I hate the fact that Deckard is a replicant for two reasons; first because it ruins the core love story of Rachel learning what is to be truly human from Deckard, and Deckard regaining his humanity through loving Rachel.

I don’t know the mythology behind Green Arrow except what I saw on Smallville, and to be perfectly honest that Oliver was a bit of a pussy for a vigilante superhero, so I was quite impressed that this Oliver looks and acts like someone I could actually believe can beat up bad guys.

I think we got another pairing that works, Kat and Hicks; Garry and Bill was the first and they work so well off each other and Nina Rosen make a good act, now we just need to find Rachel her alter ego and we’ll have a full set.

While I generally give Doctor Who a pass on the stuff that doesn’t make sense this episode was not very well thought out; it still had its great moments which I put down to the cast who basically carried the show, but this time I was very disappointed with the explanations, such as they were, for the exit of the…

"By the end of the war and the beginning of the nuclear age, the boats were left behind. They'd missed their era of relevance by a few years."

I don’t get your point, and besides, they were presently in 2012 which would have them sent back 74 years if 1938 was the target.

It is true that it is an assumption but I was going on what the Doctor told Rory at the Winter Quays that the Angels were going to send him back 30-40 years.

Rory: Where are we?

When the paradox happened they were transported back to the beginning which was present day New York, so if they died in their eighties and were presently in their thirty’s they would have been sent back to the sixties.

Corpse Processing Recovery, freshness guaranteed!

I don’t think the problem is the death of a character but the idea of a “paradox” in the first place, let’s face it, a paradox is just another way of saying something isn’t possible, and in this case time travel.

Ever since I heard that the last episode the Ponds were in involved Weeping Angels my first thought was Blink and of Kathy Nightingale being sent back in time to live out the rest of her life and this was going to be fate of one or both of the Ponds.

What works for you in an atmosphere works against you in space, while the thrust to weight ratio between a small fighter and a larger ship means it can theoretically accelerate faster than the larger mass this only gives an advantage in a stop to speed scenario, but you need to account for manoeuvrability as well…

Speaking of Aussies this was the first episode I’ve heard John Noble slip his accent on the show, more than just a word but almost a whole sentence the Aussie came out.

She has to be one of the most talented female character actors out there at the moment, she can play cute and adorable, hard and unflinching, psycho and scary with such aplomb and seamlessly switch between all of them with ease; she definitely deserves to be a lead in her own show!

Trial by turbine-al

Time travel stories seem to come in two broad types, one from the perspective of the traveller and the other from the perspective of the verse, and depending which one is used that effects the success of the type of time travel story used.

I like Sweeney Todd better, go for a haircut end up as a pie, too bad it’s fictitious. :)

It could also be a type of backsword.