it is almost impossible to deny that the most well-known and iconic new who monster is the weeping angel these stone assassins are synonymous with Doctor Who and their prominent in larger pop culture but over the years the weeping angels have fallen from grace the iconic villains have decreased in quality but how did this happen [Music] [Applause] in the first two series of the revived era of Doctor Who writer Steven Moffat had cemented himself as an immensely talented writer penning the popular series 1 - part of the empty child and the series 2 episode the girl in the fireplace with these huge successes showrunner Russell T Davies was determined to bring Moffat back for the 2007 series 3 after outside commitments forced Moffat to turn down three stories for the series Moffat eventually offered to write the now customary character light episode of that series the story that followed was the hugely popular and beloved masterpiece that is blink blink is most certainly a phenomenal episode of Doctor Who it is a masterfully crafted short horror film with great tension and an unsettling story but the main focus of the episode and its praise is the inventive antagonist that is the group of weeping angels the episode stresses that the weeping angels are a mysterious race of assassins who are only able to move when unobserved and that they kill people by sending them back in time and feeding on their potential energy blink make sure to set out the specific guidelines of the weeping angels and their in universe law their rules were pretty much set in stone no pun intended but then things changed drastically in 2010 Steven Moffat officially took over as Doctor Who showrunner for his first series in charge Moffat wanted to shift the focus away from old monsters despite this goal Moffat was keen to bring back his own popular creation the weeping angels under any circumstances this would always have been a risky move to make due to the acclaim of Blink it is generally accepted that sequels often failed to match the quality of their predecessors aware of this Moffat looked to Ridley Scott's alien movies for inspiration both the 1979 film alien and it's 1986 sequel aliens are widely known beloved and acclaimed sci-fi films unlike most sequels which try to replicate their predecessors aliens is a complete shift in narrative and tone compared to the original alien it does not try to be alien to it instead has a new different spin on it this was one of the core factors in the remarkable success of aliens so with this inspiration Moffat decided to create a more exciting action story to contrast the isolated intense horror of blink blink and alien are tight claustrophobic stories following one main protagonist as she tries to survive and defeat the threat of a powerful alien 1986 his aliens was a more open fast-paced narrative with a larger cast and a much bigger amount of the villain which Moffat mirrored with the time of angels and flesh and stone' these two episodes were bigger faster and not 100% more guns than blink but what went wrong everything everything is wrong with these two episodes they are pathetic I mean I have been to alpha OMA Traxxas and there was no crushed Byzantium or maze of the Dead or anything unforgivable but no in all seriousness the two-parter is actually quite good it is staggeringly impressive that these were the first two episodes to be filmed for series 5 meaning that they were Matt Smith and Karen Gillan's first performances in their roles the main problem with this story is the weeping angels themselves remember all of those specific rules and law from blink or you can just throw that all away in blink the law was explained quite clearly the weeping angels are not real statues nobody knows what they look like when they move and if they catch you they send you back in time to live out your days until you die in the past simple enough right time of angels takes all of that law and just kind of writes over it for whatever reason when the angels in this story move they stay stone this is a significant misstep by Moffat because it was already established that they are only stone statues when observed a huge part of the appeal of the weeping angels is the mystery of what they could possibly look like when unobserved it is an effect very similar to the midnight entity from series 4 and mimic you from Pokemon the best aspect is not knowing what these things really are they force the audience to use their imagination and conjure up hundreds of possibilities fans naturally itch to find out the truth and solve the mystery but there is literally no possible answer that could be satisfying enough for everyone the weeping angels should never be shown moving in any way at all it is imperative that this element of the weeping angels stay shrouded in mystery so attempting to explain the mystery is a grave and damaging mistake by Moffat the movement of the weeping angels was not Moffitt's only mistake with this two-parter one of the other main floors is the method of the angels killing their prey instead of zapping people back into the past the Angels in series 5 just snap necks there is nothing to gain by snapping people's necks this disregards their established law for no reason at all the weeping angels send people back in time because they feed on the potential energy of the victim that is their food source and that is how they hunt they cannot feed by snapping people's necks all that the neck snapping achieves is the relegation of the weeping angels from a hugely creative and innovative monster to just another slash a villain killing for fun this shift in the characterization of the weeping angels puts a huge dent in their original brilliant ingenuity the episode's attempt to justify the neck snapping through the character of Angel Bob if you're dead how can I be talking to you however rather than fixing the issue of the neck snapping the problem is worsened and a new problem is introduced the weeping angels snap Bob's neck in order to speak through him but this does not justify the deaths of Christian Angelo and father Octavian using Bob as a mouthpiece is a huge blow to the mystique of the weeping angels because we now hear their thoughts plans and motivations this is an example of law aresia and it is clearly a consequence of Moffat writing himself into a corner having no way to establish the motivation of the Angels within the context of the episode even so this is no excuse for giving a voice to a villain who does not need one the motivations can be clearly and easily established as the weeping angels chasing the protagonists by simply having the doctor explain this which they already do the only casualty of Rome moving the voice of the Angels would be the removal of the iconic cliffhanger speech and some other scenes but the story can easily be rewritten to accommodate these changes and restore the mystery and threat of the weeping angels Steven Moffat did however manage to add one new piece of law to the weeping angels that built upon rather than detract from the established law from blink after blink aired a lot of viewers including an eight-year-old me would spend extensive periods of time trying to think of ways to stop the Angels or catch them out one of the most obvious ideas was putting a camera on a weeping angel to catch it Steven Moffat clearly understood this line of thinking because it was directly addressed early in the time of angels with a weeping angel being monitored by CCTV however Moffat goes a step further and explains exactly why the camera idea doesn't work the episode explains that every image of a weeping angel becomes a separate weeping angel this is such a bizarre and unnecessary choice whilst it does make for some interesting visuals and provides an arc for Amy Pond it seems to directly contravene the established weeping angel law once again by staring into the eyes of a weeping angel the angel imprints itself into Amy's mind and begins to take her over because this is apparently what happens when you stare into the eyes of an angel on the surface this sounds fine but it becomes confusing and illogical when you apply this logic to blink during blink Larry finds himself cornered by an angel and he stares into its eyes unlike Amy in time of angels larry is fine and does not end up with an angel inside his mind this makes no sense and just works against the law therefore even adding new law to the weeping angels causes damage to the established law whilst the general narrative and direction of the series five weeping angel two-parter plays out much like aliens the characterization of the villains ends up stumbling it could actually be argued that the two-parter actually mirrors Alien Resurrection or prometheus in that it seems to overwrite established law in favor of skewing and rewriting the law to fit the narrative rather than fitting the narrative around the law aliens added so much more to the established law of the xenomorph that time of angels added nothing to the established law of the weeping angels only actually taking away from the law and rewriting it however this was not the last weeping angel story in Doctor Who would their next story right the wrongs of time of angels and flesh and stone' the short answer to that is no the weeping angels made their return in the 2012 episode the Angels Take Manhattan aside from the terrible name based on the Muppets the episode is actually a fairly fun romp along with drawing a satisfying and emotional end to Amy and Rory's time as companions of the eleventh Doctor but much like the series five story the weeping angels are the main downside of the episode and their law was scrunched up ripped apart and awkwardly glued back together in a new configuration the most glaring issue is by far the most famous and memorable during the cold open of the episode detective Sam garner finds himself trapped by the weeping angels at their battery farm of winter key fleeing to the roof he turns to see that the Statue of Liberty is a weeping angel it is safe to say that everyone was confused as hell by the shot it is frankly a logical nightmare this has always been a focal point of criticism of this particular episode despite being such a minor part of the episode the biggest problem with the Statue of Liberty being a weeping angel is its movement in a city as big and lively as Manhattan there is literally no that not one single person would happen to glance up and see Lady Liberty at any one point during its journey from Liberty Island to win turkey the chances of the Statue making it all the way undetected are near impossible the Statue of Liberty being a weapon angel is barely even referenced in the episode outside of one line of dialogue I always wanted to visit the Statue of Liberty [Music] there is no proper explanation or reason for it being an angel it is just there as to throw away shots whilst it does make for a good visual it is so detrimental to the entire episode because it leaves a lingering sour taste in the viewers mouth it could have easily been explained as some kind of hologram or trick designed to scare victims but they simply refuse to acknowledge it the Statue of Liberty weeping angel also proves to be hugely contradictory to the law introduced in series 5 as mentioned earlier the series 5 two-parter established the rule that any image of an angel is itself an angel this becomes extremely problematic when you take into account the Statue of Liberty status as an internationally famous landmark if any image of an angel is an angel all the pictures photos and videos of the Statue of Liberty would be weeping angels this once again highlights the lasting damage that the series 5 two paths are had on the law of the weeping angels because not only is the Statue of Liberty a weeping angel every single image or depiction of it is also a weeping angel the series five and seven weeping angel episodes have led me to the conclusion that the more the viewer has to think about the logic of the weeping angels the more fallacies and inconsistencies begin to appear much like the xenomorph the more we learn about the weeping angels the less impactful they are blink is so good because the angels are mysterious and unexplained putting more of a spotlight on the weeping angels only damages them which is why their cameos in episodes such as the god complex and time of the doctor are so brilliant in these two episodes the weeping angels only make short cameos but they're treated perfectly because they're shown at face value without trying to add any law or make the viewer think too much as the main villain the weeping angels flounder and fail due to their law imposed limits but as cameos they are effective and intimidating cameos mean that you don't have to rationalize the weeping angels being there you just know that they are a big deal and serve as a threat the series 5 in series 7 weeping angel episodes serve similar roles as Prometheus and alien covenant because they try to explain and justify the existence of inventive villains who rely on the viewer not thinking too much about them in closing Steven Moffat diluted his own creativity by bringing back the weeping angels for repeat appearances because they cannot effectively function as the centerpiece of more than one story the weeping angels are not quite as versatile as other landmark sci-fi villains like the Xenomorphs and the Daleks the weeping angels are so incredibly inventive and unique that they become a catch-22 of sorts because they end up being too unique and creative to revisit much like Moffitt's other creation the Vashta Nerada ever since 2007 s blink the weeping angels have slowly become a prime example of why sometimes just sometimes mysteries should remain unsolved some things you never find out and that's okay [Music] [Applause]