The Discontinuity Guide (Doctor Who) [Paperback]

Paul Cornell (Author), Martin Day (Author), Keith Topping (Author)

Book Description

Series: Doctor Who | Publication Date: July 1995

Mass Market paperback.

Product Details

• Paperback: 304 pages
• Publisher: London Bridge (Mm); First published in Great Britain in 1995 by Doctor Who Books an imprint of Virgin edition (July 1995)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0426204425
• ISBN-13: 978-0426204428
• Product Dimensions: 7.2 x 4.3 x 1.1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 6.4 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 4.7 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,602,955 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

9 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Dr. Who analyzed with a fine tooth comb, July 8, 2002

By 

Daniel J. Hamlow (Narita, Japan) - See all my reviews
(HALL OF FAME REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Discontinuity Guide (Doctor Who) (Paperback)

Paul Cornell, Martin Day, and Keith Topping really must have taken a year's worth vacation days to come up with this book, and they spent all that time watching Dr. Who stories over and over. Some people get all the fun! However, their purpose was to examine programs, stories, or movies that influenced certain stories, and more important to point out goofs and links, both within a story and the entire series, which is where the C-word comes in--continuity. They also write down dialogue that have double meanings, makes one (well, them anyway) cringe, and those that are positively memorable.

Example of a Dialogue Triumph: "Listen to that! It's the sound of the planet screaming its rage." That was from Inferno, where the Doctor is referring to the parallel Earth that will soon become engulfed in molten lava. From Colony In Space, when Jo asks on any other living things on Uxarius, Mary Ashe answers: "There's no animal life, just a few birds and insects." Now that's a Dialogue Disaster!

And finally, to find out what they thought of it, there's The Bottom Line section. While I see pointing out errors useful, there is a clear border between justifiable mistakes and petty nitpicking. In the latter case, well, there could be an unstated explanation. Why, does everything have to be explained for the benefit of the viewer? When I was in the now-defunct Friends of Doctor Who fan club, one member disparagingly referred to it as the Disco Guide.

One justifiable "goof," for example, is the in The Three Doctors, where UNIT, being a top secret establishment, has a sign advertising its headquarters, as well as Lethbridge-Stewart's name listing him as commanding officer. That's understandable. I mean, to use a similar example, would the powers that had Kennedy killed have a sign reading "Military Industry Complex-Assassinating JFK since 1963" on their headquarters? Puh-leeze!

An easily explained "goof" is when Tegan speaks to Kukurtji, the ancient-era aborigine, in Four To Doomsday. Cornell and company complained that Tegan responded in the correct language and era. Well, pardon me, guys, but remember The Masque Of Mandragora, when the Doctor explained to Sarah that her ability to understand foreign languages was a Time Lord gift he shared with her? Surely it applies there? So there!

Which of my favorite stories do they give the highest honors to? Spearhead From Space, Inferno, The Pirate Planet, Remembrance Of The Daleks, and The Curse Of Fenric, to name a few. Lowest honors? The Time Monster, Monster Of Peladon, Planet Of The Spiders, The Android Invasion, Time-Flight, and Time And The Rani. Well, actually, there aren't any Who stories I totally loathe but I do admit there are some that are worth watching but aren't as good as others.

The troika also do not look favorably on Dalek and Cybermen stories and go out of their way to find flaws. There must be a full page of flaws listed in Resurrection Of The Daleks! The Invasion doesn't get shredded as much as Earthshock and Attack Of The Cybermen, or Silver Nemesis. It's very generous in rating Timelash, surprising considering its reputation as the worst Who story ever.

There are elaborate histories on the Daleks and Cybermen in here. They also point out that Loch Ness is referred to in two stories, Terror Of The Zygons and Timelash. One can assume that the Zygons, with their obviously superior power, killed the Borad. Well, maybe they did.

Still, I use this as a valuable reference guide, and a work comparing analyses of various Dalek, Cybermen, and Earth Empire histories with other Who works. I've gained an appreciation for program continuity.

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Irreverant but far from irrelivant, August 13, 2001

By 

Margaret (Buffalo, NY United States) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Discontinuity Guide (Doctor Who) (Paperback)

I bought this book because the title intrigued me. Now I can't sit down to watch a video without this trusty tome by my side. The book is interesting, informative, painstakingly detailed and often hilarious in its observations. I was also pleased to see that when the authors disagreed on a rating, it was noted in the text. (Poor Creature for the Pit!) While some of the goofs need to be watched frame-by-frame to catch, others are so glaringly obvious I couldn't believe I'd missed them.

I purchased the "Pocket Essentials" recently and was extremely dissapointed. With this volume to compare it too...well, actually, there is no comparison. The "Guide" is quite simply better.

1 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars At last--a funny reference guide!, May 25, 2001

By 

M. Konczewski (Havertown, PA United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Discontinuity Guide (Doctor Who) (Paperback)

"The Discontuity Guide" is typical of the works written by hardcore British Who fans--they adore the show, but don't let that get in the way of tough (sometimes harsh) criticism. Even such sacred cows as the Tom Baker years get the same tough love as the worst of the Pertwee years.

What really made this book interesting for me was the authors obvious well-read background, which came out in the "Roots" sections. It's here that you can see the sources for some of the many tropes of Who (and all TV SF, for that matter).

I was a bit put off by the insistence of the authors to find a gay subtext in virtually every Who episode. Apparently British Who fandom has a very vocal guy section, some of who are intent on proving that many Who characters are gay. Whatever floats your boat.....

If you're a Who fan...well, you probably already own this! If you're not, you still will get a chuckle out of this book.