Board Thread:Inclusion debates/@comment-2.26.183.189-20170416191252/@comment-4028641-20170416203237

2.26.183.189 wrote: Just wondering why this is marked as invalid

It's simple really. It shouldn't be.

A Friend from the Future is, basically, a prequel story. The reason that it has confused the admins is that, basically, it's set in the middle of the episode and not the beginning.

Many might presume, based on the fact that it was an attempt to preview Bill's role in the show, that this is meant to be a clip from the episode. And thus, if it wasn't used, it's an invalid source. AKA, because it wasn't used it's a deleted scene. This has little logic.

Here's the facts: The Pilot was designed from the top to bottom to match up to the (already released and accepted) Friend from the Future.

And yet, bizarrely, SOTO's logic on why we can't include it is that "This was never intended to actually be part of Bill's story." Allow me to blatantly disprove that with quotes from the highest authority that we have.

"Interviewer: Steven, did you always plan to re-use Friend From the Future, at least partially?

Moffatt: I wasn't sure at all. Well, I mean, because I'm such a Doctor Who fan... and I need everything to fit... in continuuity... and I stay up awake at night until I can figure out how... UNIT dating [works] (that's an obscure one, and I have fixed it)... I knew it had to be right at the beggining because of the way she was talking, so... so we just had the very beggining of it so we knew how it fits. And for die-hard, slightly strange excessive (and let's be honest, there's 7 or 8 of them in the audience of Doctor Who like myself) that's where it fits. You can all sleep at night now.""

Two things that we can gleam from this. Number 1, this short was a completely different production from the actual episode. Thus, we can not see it as a deleted scene. Much like any TARDISode or Prequel, it was a separate product released ahead of time and created on a completely different production block.

Two, it indeed was meant for us to be able to cover it. And in the actual episode, this is obvious. They put Bill in the same costume, they put them in the same situation, they have the Doctor EXPLAIN things in the episode that happen in the short, and they show the beginning and the end of it. If someone has better counter-evidence than Moffat telling us "it fits," I'd love to hear it. But I doubt anyone does. Because it's valid. Clearly.