Dr. Who

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Mr. 0 said:
Eccleston was also going through shit in his personal life, like eating disorder, his father's cognitive decline (they gave him shit for wanting to visit him on his deathbed or attend his funeral, I can't remember which it was).
Click to expand...
I guess the Doctor Who production is just as bad as Cheers. After the actor playing Coach died, the actors were not allowed to go to his funeral.
 
Miller said:
I guess the Doctor Who production is just as bad as Cheers. After the actor playing Coach died, the actors were not allowed to go to his funeral.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of things they are not telling us, and that they are always lying about.

I mean does anyone actually believe the usual BS that current doctors all just happen to have the epiphany that "it was time to leave" or that they don't want to be "typecast" and that ",it's better to leave when you are having fun".

Its very obvious they get fired and that new show runners want their own actors. Maybe I really only believe that story from David Tennant because Moffat says he did ask him to stay for one last season. And Matt Smith because he was very young and it really was best for him to move on.

Capaldi obviously had to go because Chibnall didn't want him. It's as simple as that.

A lot of what they tell us is simply corporate speak.
 
Last edited:
SherlockMexicano said:
I recently heard another reason Chibnall did the timeless children shit was because he was adopted, so he made the doctor adopted.

I mean it's cool if a companion or whatever turns out to be adopted. Another matter is to retcon the main character to be adopted just to self indulge yourself.

So not only this was a horrible retcon, but he is using the doctor to self insert himself. Now that explains why Jodie was written like an a selfish asshole. Remember the "I am too socially awkward to comfort a terminal cancer patient like?" Now that makes sense.

The worst part is that Retconing this will be nigh impossible because he is using "muh minorities as a shield." I am not even white and I despise Chibnall inclusive shit because let's not kid ourselves he did it out pure selfish reasons.
Click to expand...
Well now this just makes me even more annoyed.

Because you know who would have made some weird sense as the Timeless Child?

SUSAN!

And just imagine what kind of implication that would have on the first episodes of Dr. Who suddenly going back and realizing that the First Doctor went and stole this child who was being experimented on and scampered away to give her a normal life. It would have had that whole "adoption" angle on it and really added something to the series. (heck it would have even made shippers happy because now there's no implication that the Doctor married and had kids who had kids but merely "adopted" the role)

Dang it Chibnall. Now I'm even angrier.
 
SherlockMexicano said:
I recently heard another reason Chibnall did the timeless children shit was because he was adopted, so he made the doctor adopted.

I mean it's cool if a companion or whatever turns out to be adopted. Another matter is to retcon the main character to be adopted just to self indulge yourself.

So not only this was a horrible retcon, but he is using the doctor to self insert himself. Now that explains why Jodie was written like an a selfish asshole. Remember the "I am too socially awkward to comfort a terminal cancer patient ?" Now that makes sense.

The worst part is that Retconing this will be nigh impossible because he is using "muh minorities as a shield." I am not even white and I despise Chibnall inclusive shit because let's not kid ourselves he did it out pure selfish reasons.
Click to expand...
Flexo said:
Well now this just makes me even more annoyed.

Because you know who would have made some weird sense as the Timeless Child?

SUSAN!

And just imagine what kind of implication that would have on the first episodes of Dr. Who suddenly going back and realizing that the First Doctor went and stole this child who was being experimented on and scampered away to give her a normal life. It would have had that whole "adoption" angle on it and really added something to the series. (heck it would have even made shippers happy because now there's no implication that the Doctor married and had kids who had kids but merely "adopted" the role)

Dang it Chibnall. Now I'm even angrier.
Click to expand...
At this point it sounds like they should've just adapted Lungbarrow (it DID start out as an early draft of Ghost Light, so that would've brought production history full circle). It had the Doctor being a completely different but very powerful being before becoming the Doctor and even had Susan being his adoptive granddaughter of sorts (she was the granddaughter of the original being, the Other, and she recognized him in his new form). It probably would've caused less controversy (or at least less than it did in the 90s when it came out)
 
SherlockMexicano said:
I recently heard another reason Chibnall did the timeless children shit was because he was adopted, so he made the doctor adopted.

I mean it's cool if a companion or whatever turns out to be adopted. Another matter is to retcon the main character to be adopted just to self indulge yourself.

So not only this was a horrible retcon, but he is using the doctor to self insert himself. Now that explains why Jodie was written like an a selfish asshole. Remember the "I am too socially awkward to comfort a terminal cancer patient ?" Now that makes sense.

The worst part is that Retconing this will be nigh impossible because he is using "muh minorities as a shield." I am not even white and I despise Chibnall inclusive shit because let's not kid ourselves he did it out pure selfish reasons.
Click to expand...
Mixed messages from the Progressives there! I've had pro-abortion people argue with me that it is better to abort a child than have that child face adoption.
 
Hongourable Madisha said:
A granny type character could have worked, I could see the Doctor as a mama bear protecting her companions or a fairy godmother whisking them off on adventures. Miriam Margolyes or Angela Lansbury would've been great at that. Or a sort of icy schoolmarm or headmistress type, like Maggie Smith as Miss Jean Brodie or McGonagall, and like William Hartnell's Doctor. And that's just sticking to very basic clichéd female authority figure stereotypes, a good writer could've done so much with those as a starting point or done something different and interesting while sticking with the Doctor's character. Missy was a great version of the Master that brought something new to the role but was still the Master. 13 wasn't like the Doctor at all or even an interesting character.
Click to expand...

I like those ideas. To me, Jodie's Doctor felt childish and not in a good way. She seemed awkward, not too sure of herself, and in more than one instance too eager to let an elderly character sacrifice himself to resolve the story. All that the gender swap of Doctor Who brought us is the weakest one so far IMO.

I agree that an older actress could have brought a stronger presence, but maybe present-day BBC won't countenance a middle-aged or older woman as a leading role in a popular adventure show.
They didn't smash any of the glass ceilings they intended to. With Jodie, it looked like they wanted to keep female Dr Who young, sort of attractive but in the most sexless way possible, and nix any strong female characteristics like maternal instinct or matriarchal authority.
I don't watch much modern TV/cinema but I hear that "strong" female characters with no feminine qualities whatsoever are trendy now, because women being feminine is sexist, or something. I can see that kind of thinking at play here.
 
ShortPoppy said:
I agree that an older actress could have brought a stronger presence, but maybe present-day BBC won't countenance a middle-aged or older woman as a leading role in a popular adventure show.
Click to expand...
I think a gruff, older woman with some regality to her, like a slightly younger Helen Mirren, would have made a great Doctor as a throwback to Hartnell's general style. I could also think of black Doctors who could be good, and again, it's someone like a younger Idris Elba, or even Mos Def doing something like his Ford Prefect (one of the few good things about that particular Hitchhiker's reboot).
 
ShortPoppy said:
I agree that an older actress could have brought a stronger presence, but maybe present-day BBC won't countenance a middle-aged or older woman as a leading role in a popular adventure show.
Click to expand...
While Amanda Redman is past it now I'd have loved to have seen someone like her doing it based off her work on New Tricks when she was in her mid-40s.
 
To me, the number one quality Doctor has to have is every action, every word has to be a call to adventure. When you see the Tardis and hear the Doctor talk, you should want to follow him and go to stars.

I don't think the show came into its own until this happened with the Fourth and even though people here seem to like him, I don't think Capaldi did it well either, I wouldn't drop everything to follow him through time and space.

And this lack of charm, mystique, charisma or whatever you'd call it is what exactly Jodie did wrong. She doesn't invite me to a world unknown.

In my mind there is a very clear style I would want for a female Doctor and that is, Trinity from the first Matrix movie. Follow the white rabbit into the blue box.
 
LanternsNSongs said:
I don't think the show came into its own until this happened with the Fourth and even though people here seem to like him, I don't think Capaldi did it well either, I wouldn't drop everything to follow him through time and space.
Click to expand...
I disagree on Capaldi. This was a feature not a bug, He was supposed to be a bit of an opposite Matt Smith in that he was not very sociable, warm, or a hugging person.

They toned him down and the end, but we were supposed to question if even he was a good person. We still don’t know if he pushed that robot guy on the ledge for one. But in the end he ended up being one of the most morally good doctors.

But that doesn’t make him objectively bad. Just a matter of taste.
 
Last edited:
IMG_20240119_213647.jpg

Supposedly she was fired for being a diva and is being replaced with a Pajeet.
 
Vesperus said:
That'll bring the viewers back for sure.
Click to expand...
It would if they got one of those Bollywood Babes as the companion. Some of them are gorgeous enough to challenge Karen Gillan.

But then that may make too many brits realize how much they lost when giving up the empire and we can't have that.
 
Chaos Theorist said:
I doubt she was fired for being a diva, its more Russell just wanting a stream of constant change for the show.

You dont last long on Coronation Street if you were being a diva
Click to expand...
You got a point, but if Rusell just wanted to get rid of her he didn’t need to accuse her of being a diva. He just had to say her story arch was over, and that‘s it. Lots of companions only last a season.

I mean, maybe she is a completely sweet person that just happened to anger the wrong people. Similar to Eccleston. So I do think there is more to it than that.
 
SherlockMexicano said:
I mean, maybe she is a completely sweet person that just happened to anger the wrong people. Similar to Eccleston. So I do think there is more to it than that.
Click to expand...
Maybe to that nonstop raging homosexual RTD, just expecting a professional working environment is being a "diva." That seems to be what happened with Eccleston.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom