‘Doctor Who: P.S.’ The Finale of the Ponds


Editor
10/12/12 11:36am
6 Comments

After Doctor Who‘s heartbreaking mid-season finale, “The Angels Take Manhattan”, BBCOne has released a video of what happened after Amy and Rory’s farewell. It’s an unshot scene by Chris Chibnall, titled ‘P.S.’

Because the scene was never shot, the video comprises of script text, concept art, and a voiceover from Arthur Darvill as Rory Williams. It begins with a scene from the show of Brian Williams insisting that Rory and Amy go on travelling with the Doctor, then fades to a text of the script depicting Brian staying behind at the Pond residence, watering the plants, when someone rings the doorbell. A character named Anthony gives Brian a letter. Arthur Darvill’s voiceover reads aloud the contents of the letter, telling Brian what happened to Amy and Rory, and that they’re not coming back. Rory assures his dad that they’re happy, and surprises him with the identity of the mystery guest who delivered the letter.

Watch the full video below:

What did you think of the video? Would you have liked for this scene to have been included in the episode? Did you cry? Let us know in the comments!

You Might Also Like:

  • 19yearslater

    What? I just have something in my eye . . . loved this little scene. Perfect.

  • katie K

    That was soooo goood!!!!! Why was this cut from the show??? I am most definitely crying and full of feels!

  • critterfur

    Very nice. Reasons it might have been left unfilmed? Well, maybe the producers thought two weepy farewell letters were too many (one from Amy to the Doctor, one from Rory to his dad). If they had a choice (and were limited on time), I guess they picked Amy’s letter to represent the Ponds. Another potential reason: Maybe Rory’s letter was too specific, too final. I know Moffatt has stated that this was the definitive end for the Ponds, but this unshot scene really lays out not only the rest of Amy and Rory’s life in New York, but also a son (a little too reminiscent of Kathy Nightingale’s son showing up in Blink). Maybe the writers and producers wanted, in the end, to keep the Pond’s ultimate fate more vague, albeit happy. And third (and as an American, I’m admittedly just spit-balling here, so forgive me): perhaps the tendency for some British viewers to shun what they consider overly-done sentimentality (some, not all) made the scene go away. Anyway, it is a lovely little scene…nice of the BBC to at least put it out there in this simplified form. It would have been even more effective if Brian Williams had been introduced years ago, when Rory was first shown (Brian Williams, can’t get over that…he’s a famous news-anchor over here in the U.S.).

  • Bails

    Yes. Whilst the separation of Rody and Amelia and the Dr’s inability to simply pick them back up in 1940 (say) thus avoiding the problems of 1937 makes very little (or no) sense, this snippet gives far more closure.

    This would have been a far more effective finish to the episode – and the story of the Ponds – then what was shown.

    Thanks

  • 19yearslater

    How do people not understand the concept of locked times? The Doctor can’t go back to the good days of Gallifrey because they’re locked. It’s the premise of the show . . .

  • cara

    The story of the detective doesn’t make a lot of sense without this scene. though he did not need to be the grandson. It ties up the story of the Ponds, but it is quite a long explanation for something that need not be so long. It is enough to say that they were happy and together and that River is not their only child together. Because Asylum of the Daleks pulled up the idea of what would happen to them without the Doctor already.