Man… This whole “the show is about change” thing? Yeah, sure, but does that mean everything HAS to be radically different every time just so that it is different? Things aren’t automatically good just because they’re different, even on a show “about change”.

“I thought a man in a suit would be stupid so I obviously did the only other option, big fucking skeleton that doesn’t do anything worth mention.”

(Disclaimer: Time People being eaten has never stopped them from coming back.)

Yeah, I too was perfectly fine with it (Omega as og Omega was “dead”/outside of influence after all, and this Omega was ever-existing outside of time with a lot of influence & in line with sessional arc about god magic) …

… but generally speaking - if they even bothered to offer an explanation (which in this case they did, it was central to the plot), I feel like I should be happy/glad with the matter as in so many other cases (Doctor Who too, but I mean mostly other such universes) change previously known things significantly (just to “look cool” as the sole goal & noting else) & don’t offer anything in return, not even a background hint for an explanation.

I didn’t have any problem with Omega’s appearance - his whole deal was that he could reshape his universe at will, so…sure, giant bone monster, why not?

How easily he was dispatched is another matter. It’s sort of what I expected from the episode, but still not exactly satisfying.

“There was plenty of fuss made about Winston Churchill being in Doctor Who, when there’s plenty of history to suggest he wasn’t such a good guy. And that’s always the way.”

He added: "Our history of slavery, our way of walking through the world is constantly being re-analysed. So I like to think it’s the same on Gallifrey… Omega has been re-contextualised, and the story gets bolder and changes over time.

“We don’t want to repeat the past, we want to push it forward.”

This seems like a very odd train of thought, though.