Jodie Whittaker announced as the new, 13th Doctor

Home Forums Episodes The Thirteenth Doctor Jodie Whittaker announced as the new, 13th Doctor

This topic contains 546 replies, has 81 voices, and was last updated by  Craig 2 years, 1 month ago.

Viewing 50 posts - 451 through 500 (of 547 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #61375
    Serahni @serahni

    Odd, it chewed up my response again once I edited it.

     

    @nick  I wouldn’t want it thought that I’m against the casting because I’m absolutely not.  I’m looking forward to what a new actor brings to the role, I just hope she’s allowed to be an actor first and a woman second.  I’m aware that the subtext will always be there, I acknowledge the power of it, and I don’t expect it to be entirely ignored, I’m just hoping we won’t drown in it. I watched Attack the Block the other night and really enjoyed it.  (Great piece of storytelling, very raw and real.)  I’ll be very interested to see Jodie’s interpretation of our favourite Time Lord, as well as our new showrunner’s contribution to the ongoing narrative.  I want the stories to be strong and not weighed down by “well, now that I’m a woman…”

    And I agree, we’ll probably get a male companion at some point, which is overdue.  And I think it’ll be a positive thing for young boys and men to have the character that represents the “every” person now resemble them after so long without one.  Mind you, I was a bit iffy when they decided to make Bill gay that it was a precursor for later things because, oh look, The Doctor now looks female.  Wham, companion mooning commences.  Given that Bill seems to have her love story now, and we’re not that sure she’ll be back, I guess this is unlikely but it did make me wonder if it was a set-up in advance.  Just when we thought we were safe!

    #61380
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    #61381
    blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave

    @wolfweed

    I am now waiting to see how the Daily Mail and the Sun use quotes like “I’m not a real Doctor” and “I don’t know what to do!”. Given that they sunk to the depths of publishing naked photos of Jodie Whittaker, I imagine the usual double standard will kick in.

    #61382
    JimTheFish @jimthefish
    Time Lord

    @blenkinsopthebrave–

    One would hope that certain sections of the Press take SM’s advice, given here….

    #61384
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    Peter Davison has been hounded off of twitter.

    All he said this weekend was that lots of boys would be without a role model with a female Doctor (In fact he welcomed Jodie).

    Whether or not you think this is a silly view, it should be remembered that many times in the past, he has given this as a reason why (in his opinion) the Doctor should never be female.

    However, it seems that (due to press representation) Uber-Feminists have seen fit to make him the lone scapegoat for the (So called 20% of) fans who are also against the idea. He’s suffered 3 days of nasty abuse, which seems unfair given he has not said anything ‘nasty’ himself (unlike the 20%)…

    pd

    Ah twitter! (And journalism)

    #61385
    Nick @nick

    @jimthefish @blenkinsopthebrave

    I rather hope they dont (although the whole thing is being blown up out of all proportion). For Moff to deny there is an issue with some fans and the general audience (whether its 80:20 or not – that’s just an assertion since I haven’t actually actually seen any surveys as yet) is a mistake in my opinion. I found his response to be extremely patronising, which won’t help the issue die down or go away.

    Appealing for tolerance and holding off judgements until Jodie/Chibnall have actually delivered something we can watch and appraise is a better response. I haven’t read or watched him making this point of point. Ever former Doctor has also seemed to avoid this sort of pitfall as well. Tradionalists, if that’s what we are badging them, have a valid point of view even if some (many even) also hold offensive opinions, which we dislike.

    #61387
    JimTheFish @jimthefish
    Time Lord

    @wolfweed — I saw Davison has quit Twitter and it is a real shame because his original comments have been totally misrepresented. He was very encouraging about JW and did little more than ‘wonder’ about the removal of a male role model. Personally I think he’s worrying unnecessarily for reasons gone into in detail elsewhere but that doesn’t mean his concerns are unjustified or should be ridiculed. And it certainly doesn’t mean he should be attacked or hounded from a public forum.

    But really, it emphasises once again that aspects of fandom really need to take a long, hard look at themselves. SM was hounded off Twitter unnecessarily — and how great would it been if he’d been continuing to Tweet all this time? Davison’s been a great envoy on Twitter too. @nick is right and this all so unnecessary and really ‘wait and see’ is all anyone on either side of the debate should be doing. But speaking as someone who has been known to ply his trade in the murky world of newspapers, SM is still dead right that some journalists really need to be taken to task, particularly the ones who’ve taken it upon themselves to what essentially amounts to slut-shaming JW for having the temerity to take what they perceive to be an exclusively male role.

    On polls, the Radio Times, I think, did a poll a few days back which gave the 80/20 split. And I’m starting to think that sympathy with the ‘traditionalist’ POV can only go so far and @juniperfish might have a point on @cathannabel‘s blog that the argument from tradition is often (although obviously not always) used as a cover for something a little more insidious (and that’s leaving aside the clearly rug-chewing unpleasant misogynists that you’ll find on Twitter, FaceBook and YouTube and who can safely be discounted completely).

    #61388
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    @jimthefish

    It’s fair enough to challenge Davison’s viewpoint (But in a polite, constructive way). It’s not about winning – It’s about being kind.

    As I said, I know from the past that he was against a female Doctor for that particular reason (He’s a rare male role model who does not enjoy killing – This much is true)…

    As the sole griper at the SDCC and because of the press interpretation (Davison vs Baker!), he has borne the flack.

    Like current politics, the perception is that there are two disparate warring factions – and one must choose who one stands with. On the face of it, the Anti-Davison side is becoming almost as silly and vile as the Anti-Jodie camp.

    Thankfully, twitter and the press are not good representations of sane, sensible discussion & opinion…

    p v c

    #61389
    JimTheFish @jimthefish
    Time Lord

    @wolfweed–

    It’s fair enough to challenge Davison’s viewpoint (But in a polite, constructive way). It’s not about winning – It’s about being kind.

    If we had recommends on here, you’d get a thousand for this comment.

    But yes the factionalisation of the whole debate is just horrible — and it’s what, I’m afraid to say, the Press seems to be doing more and more. We’re no longer allowed reasoned debate. It has to be House Stark vs House Lannister. Slytherin versus Gryffindor. Brexiter versus Remain. Cybernat versus Yoon. It’s not healthy and it’s degrading our society, I think.

    I also suspect that the whole issue of a female Doctor has been co-opted on both sides by groups who don’t really give a damn about the show either way but who are just using it as another means to fight their usual special-interest battles.

    #61391
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    @jimthefish

    But Peter Purves should be beaten up in the street. And as for Tom Baker…

    kill

     

    #61392
    Nick @nick

    @wolfweed @jimthefish

    Like current politics, the perception is that there are two disparate warring factions – and one must choose who one stands with.

    Unfortunately, this sums up, for me anyway, just what is wrong with Britain today.

    I don’t know what Tom Baker (or Peter Perves) said, but I would certainly take it with a very large piece of salt if its in the Daily Star. I can easily see Baker saying something completely outrageous to take the piss out of the question.

    #61395
    JimTheFish @jimthefish
    Time Lord

    @nick — Baker said that if JW wasn’t any good she could be replaced, which is hardly earth-shattering and doesn’t live up the spin the Star is putting on it. (Fake News! Sad!)

    Purves said he would be ‘horrified’ by a female Doctor. But this was before the JW announcement. I wonder if anyone’s gone back to him since. And I’d imagine since DavisonGate, he’d go for a firm ‘no comment’ if he’s wise….

    #61396
    blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave

    @nick — the Tom Baker “story” is a typical Mirror/Sun “twist the facts to suit the headline” tactic. In fact, he said that a woman Doctor Who might be quite fun, but that if the ratings collapsed the BBC could always have her regenerate early to restore the show’s ratings. All perfectly true. But the Mirror/Sun tactic is to hide that behind a lurid and misleading headline in order to maintain, or even create, a supposed groundswell of cultural anger.

    This is what I think Moffat was complaining about. I don’t think he was dismissing the views of those with contrary opinions, rather he was making the perfectly valid point that the gutter press is, well, in the gutter, and is complicit in creating and maintaining a “moral panic” of sorts that has little foundation in reality.

    As for Peter Purves, his statement that he would be “horrified” by a female Doctor, was made 6 days ago, before the JW announcement. Of course, he may have changed his mind, but we don’t know because the gutter press want to use his statement as further evidence of post-announcement outrage that has probably disappeared after the attention-seeking twitter trolls posted their click-bait opinions a couple of days ago. So, I would hesitate from beating up a 78 year-old past presenter of Blue Peter on the street (ahem, @wolfweed). I would much prefer we simply ignore the Mirror/Sun version of the press while we figure out a way of raising the standard of public debate, and look forward to a future that includes Doctor Who but lacks the Mirror, the Sun and their ilk.

    <ok, Blenkinsop climbs down off his soapbox and shuffles off to make a cup of tea>

    #61397
    blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave

    Oh dear, I spent so much time typing that @jimthefish got in there first. Back to the cup of tea.

    #61398
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    @jimthefish  @Nick  @BlenkinsopTheBrave

    We will all remember where we were when DavisonGate broke… (Fake News! Sad!)

    wwy

     

    I would hesitate from beating up a 78 year-old past presenter of Blue Peter on the street

    (Other 78 year olds are fair game)

    #61399
    JimTheFish @jimthefish
    Time Lord

    @blenkinsopthebrave — I might have got there first, but your post expresses it far more elegantly…

    #61403
    Nick @nick

    @jimthefish @blenkinsopthebrave @wolfweed

    It’s a shame (well not really) that Trump isnt a fan and tweeting. Thanks to all of you for letting me know what the latest crap is about. Gutter journalism, is what it is, unfortunately. Its best not to pay attention, if you can.  Maybe I was a bit hard on Moff, but I do think its best not to play their game. It only makes it worse.

    #61404
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    @nick

    Always good to know what sh*t is being espoused. That way you can laugh/cry, whilst keeping your wits about you…

    sh*t

    Rebuttal is valid, especially if you’re the showrunner…

    #61407
    ichabod @ichabod

    @lisa  So I’d very much like to see her as a sort of “Orlando”. Throw in some episodes where the Doctor meets some historic figures. I like those particular episodes very much! Oh- and give her a very Bloombury outfit and a visit to meet Virginia and Vita 🙂

    Oooh, you really have it in for the haters, Lisa!  You want their heads to *expLODE*?  I like your Bloomsbury idea for at least an episode — it could be delightful!  And thanks for such an excellent example of the fresh kind of thinking that having a female DW can let loose.  (Which is, of course, what sexists and haters fear most — all that new thinking, which of course isn’t new at all, what new times might it lead to?!!!)

    @nick  Whether Jodie is a success or not playing the Doctor, she’s a fine actress and I don’t see this harming her career at all. In fact being the first (and taking all the crap) will probably have the opposite effect.
    Exactly — she’s heroic for just taking it on, but I don’t expect her to ever say so.  As another commenter commented on another page (sorry, can’t think who or where just now), men tend to do all the knickers-knotting and show-boating that they accuse women of indulging in, while women, once the see what job needs to be done, set to doing it.

     

    #61408
    ichabod @ichabod

    @jimthefish  But am I the only one surprised at how low Capaldi’s salary was?

    I thought it sounded pretty good, until I saw comparisons with all the other New Who Doctors.  What the heck?  I am glad, though, that JW will have this level of parity.

    I do find complaints of gender insult and unfairness regarding the casting of a female Doctor to be akin to a child who has been allowed to eat 100% of a cake for fifty years, now being asked to share 1/13th of it and throwing a tantrum.

    Precisely, and nicely put.

    #61409
    ichabod @ichabod

    @janetteb    . . . the Doctor calling himself Timelord when he rejects the elitism of Gallifreyan society. It does grate and I liked Danny making a point about that.

    I appreciate the title as a character point: yes, the Doctor is a rebel, but he’s also a bit arrogant — and probably also a bit insecure, since he didn’t do well at the Academy, did he?  It’s a nice little spot of confusion and conflict in the character that makes him more realistically human, IMO.

    @missy  Since the exodus of SM and PC, I feel that I have lost two dear and trusted friends.

    Yes; it might be worth remembering that pretty much everybody is feeling losses of some kind here, which is one of the things that “the end of an Era” means.

    @jimthefish  How can anyone, outside of the most rabid right-winger, be against social justice? Quite apart from anything else it runs absolutely counter to the ethos of the show.

    Truer words . . . and I couldn’t agree more about the idiocy of “Social Justice Warrior” as — a pejorative?  Seriously?  So the antagonist of an “SJW” would be — a slaver?  A lynch mob?  A man who throws acid in a woman’s face because she’s “disobedient”?  Wow.  Baffling.

    @antaus  You are so right about TV and movies rolled out like yard-goods, with only a few simple and predictable patterns to choose from.  One of the forces against such dreary foolishness is, I think, lots of competition for people’s entertainment time from cable, dish, and internet sites with fresh content.

    @wolfweed  “and — all sorts of things (giggle) . . . ”  Sure; Venusian aikido takes four arms, and didn’t the Doctor just claim that he had an additional pair?

     

     

    #61410
    genek1953 @genek1953

    I’m still awaiting an argument against that amounts to anything more than “that’s not the way it’s always been done.” And as someone else who is not ever likely to see a Doctor who looks like me, that argument doesn’t hold any sway with me at all.

    #61413
    Anonymous @

    @genek1953

    One way of expanding from that argument is for some to head over to the *Spoilers* Page -where, if you look at the vids posted (a few may contain  tiny spoilers_ there’s substantial argument over why The Doctor is/could always be a woman -separate to the argument you mentioned that people may use?

    One Colin Baker was particularly abrupt and humorous in saying, “I’m sorry Peter [Davison] the idea of boys not having  a role model is ridiculous  as an argument. What about ‘people’ as a role model. As for regen, it’s Gallifrey nothing was ever stated there as being out of canon: they might have 3 genders for all we know. He’s an alien; he has so many different elements which make him a TL including 2 hearts.”

    Those short vids  are great. As for the wankerdom of social media I think well over 80% of people were “it’s great, it’s Jodi Whittaker.” Giving people oxygen is the problem sometimes. Letting them speak about this -in large social media hubs is distracting and gives the impression that most people now hate Doctor Who!! Weird but I reckon that this group are minor -their baseless arguments certainly are.

    Thank you, Thane.

     

    #61416
    genek1953 @genek1953

    My initial reaction was, “Oh, they’ve cast a woman, that’s interesting.”  Have yet to see or hear anything that changes that.

    #61428
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    Chan-Michelle Gomez-tho…

    #61429
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    Jodie Whittaker’s character (or pseudonym) in ‘Trust Me’ is Alison Sutton, which is an anagram of

    ‘A No To Insults’

    no t i

    Jodie Whittaker is an anagram of

    ‘Hi   Irk Awe Jotted’

    #61430
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    Oops, Sorry, Alison Sutton is another character (played by someone else)…

    Jodie plays Cath Hardacre, an anagram of ‘Had Character’

    c h

    #61462
    Stew1221 @stew1221

     

    Random musings here… Remember how #11 (Matt Smith) took an inventory of body parts immediately after regeneration? – “arms, hands, fingers – lots of fingers, ears, yes, eyes too, nose – and I’ve had worse, chin, … hair – I’M A GIRL!”  That scene was a huge hint of things to come.

    I think Jodie Whittaker will do just fine, as long as the writers do their job.  Consider  Romanadvoratrelundar…  She began as the 4th Doctor’s assigned chaperone for the Key of Time arc.  She was the first companion who was the Doctor’s true equal.  A Time Lord (Lady), top of her class, brilliant, witty, arrogant, condescending.  There was an icy tension and competitiveness there, portrayed well by Mary Tamm vs. Tom Baker.  And tensions settled down when Lalla Ward took over the role.  So from that perspective it’s not that much of a stretch to imagine a Romana like character as the Doctor.  Cold Romana or warm Romana or somewhere in between.   Or maybe Jodie can borrow from the Rani, the evil bad-ass Time Lady from the Colin Baker / McCoy era.  For me it’s all up to the writers in how good the next series will be.

     

     

    #61473
    tardigrade @tardigrade

    @stew1221 Romana I being relatively cold and a touch arrogant worked well for the Key to Time series, so that she could bump heads with the Doctor. After that, I thought it was a good decision to make her much warmer as a regular companion. I’d be pretty concerned if the Doctor’s character was deliberately made less sympathetic- I think that was a key decision that damaged BG Who, when Colin Baker’s Doctor was made unlikeable, particularly initially. Lalla Ward’s Romana is one of the reasons that I’m confident that a female Doctor will work- we’re already seen Lalla playing something close to that character, and I think she could just as easily have stepped into the Doctor’s shoes.

    #61474
    whofangirl73 @whofangirl-73

    Well i too liked the Romana character, both 1 &2. I also think Romana softened as she liked the Drs lifestyle away from Gallifrey. Interesting. Still not convinced about a Female Dr, but you have raised some interesting points..

    #61490
    Craig @craig
    Emperor

    Jodie’s first encounter with the Daleks! From four years ago…

    #61500
    Missy @missy

    @antaus: re your post 61219 – an the rest as far as I can see.

    I couldn’t agree more. Naturally to be able to  criticise and judge,  I must watch series 11, or some of it at least.

    Justseeing JW in the Tardis makes me cringe. Just to repeat myself, before we knew that JW was to be the next Doctor, my OH and I ere watching Broadchurch series 3. There is ne person in this I don’t like – said I – and pointed to JW – HER! She irritates the hell out of me.  She did in Cranford too. Like Brendan Coyle,  Joanne Froggatt,Bryan Brown and, until recently Sam Neill, she is always plays herself.

    With luck, the BBC will only have given her a years contract.  Perhaps she will be a huge success, but not in this house.

    I watched the final panel interview on the 23rd July in San Diego. Going by the cheers and standing ovation PC received, as well as Steven Moffat, they were pretty popular.

    As for the presenter, who said that anyone who wasn’t happy about a female Doctor, wasn’t a Whovian, and in fact was an asshole – in English arsehole (excuse my language) ……….enough said.

    Missy

     

     

    #61502
    Missy @missy

    @mirime:  I think @missy and I feel similarly about the Twelfth Doctor – and I also don’t feel the need to have everything wrapped up neatly with a bow on top, nothing wrong with loose ends!

    Agreed. Also I have many friends who watch DW but aren’t fans, they also feel that a female Doctor is a mistake.

    Time will tell of course.

    Missy

     

     

     

    #61505
    Missy @missy

    @ichabod

    Yes; it might be worth remembering that pretty much everybody is feeling losses of some kind here, which is one of the things that “the end of an Era” means.

    True, but I could live without this loss, which is unnecessary

    Missy

    #61519
    nerys @nerys

    @wolfweed It’s fair enough to challenge Davison’s viewpoint (But in a polite, constructive way). It’s not about winning – It’s about being kind.

    @jimthefish If we had recommends on here, you’d get a thousand for this comment.

    But yes the factionalisation of the whole debate is just horrible — and it’s what, I’m afraid to say, the Press seems to be doing more and more. We’re no longer allowed reasoned debate. It has to be House Stark vs House Lannister. Slytherin versus Gryffindor. Brexiter versus Remain. Cybernat versus Yoon. It’s not healthy and it’s degrading our society, I think.

    I also suspect that the whole issue of a female Doctor has been co-opted on both sides by groups who don’t really give a damn about the show either way but who are just using it as another means to fight their usual special-interest battles.

    Yes to this. You both have summed it up far more eloquently than I could. Society and its ills, along with reaction to this latest casting of our beloved Doctor; you’ve nailed it. Discussion is no longer allowed. It must be a debate, which implies a winner and a loser. In whose world is communication a contest? Why must anyone lose, when all we’re trying to do is express thoughts and and ideas, and learn from one another?

    #61520
    winston @winston

    My granddaughter who just recently became a little Whovian was in her words “pumped” that the next Doctor would be a “girl”. At 8 years old she is near the end of the 9th Doctors adventures but she is aware that they regenerate and has 3 more Doctors to get through before she gets to 13. Still she was pretty excited about the news and did a happy dance! She has no idea about any controversy and she has no preconceived ideas about who the Doctor should be so she is just happy. I was already pretty excited about the 13th Doctor and what she would be like but now I am even happier knowing how pleased my little Whovian is.

    I figure if I don’t like her she will just be a Doctor I don’t like but I will wait and see. I will wait for so very long….

    #61524
    blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave

    @nerys — I agree with you 100%, and if it was possible to agree with you more than 100% I would!

    In many respects, I regard this site as the very best of a combination of a discussion among friends at the pub and a graduate seminar; neither work all the time, but when they do they restore your faith in humanity — nerdy humanity, of course…

    #61525
    Stew1221 @stew1221

    @whofangirl-73: I predict she loses the sonic screwdriver. It’s too much a phallic symbol.  #5 (P.D.) burned his out, if I remember right, and never replaced it. But more importantly.. Can she play a guitar?  Oh and what will poor Strax say if he encounters the Doctor now?  “Boy! What did you do with the real doctor?!”

    #61526
    Stew1221 @stew1221

    @tardigrade:  living in the US, I only caught the Tom Baker and Davidson episodes back in the 80s. But I’ve recently since caught up on Colin B. and later thru peer to peer shares and you tube.  He’s not so bad in retrospect as I think the producers put him in a bad spot with the aweful costume and broken second season.  Peri was real annoying but I suppose that’s how you Brits see all us Yanks. 🙂  It’s all in the writing so I think Jodie will do fine if they just write good entertaining stories for her Doctor, and don’t pontificate. It’s that simple, in my view.

    #61555
    tardigrade @tardigrade

    @stew1221 To be clear, I don’t blame Colin Baker for issues at the time- it was the writing and some questionable production decisions. Agreed that costume was a mess- trying much too hard to be quirky (something that carried on into McCoy’s Doctor, though perhaps a little less egregiously). And Peri is amongst my least favourite companions, so that didn’t help at all.

    I think the Doctor’s core character shouldn’t be changed too radically, and certainly not in a more unlikeable direction. With all the talk of winning people over and the Doctor as a role model, that would seem a very risky direction to take.

    #61604
    Missy @missy

    @cathannabel:  We’re on this Forum because we care about Doctor Who.  Some of us are feminists, SJWs even, some aren’t.  Surely all of us want  the show to be successful, to continue to capture the imaginations of children and adults, to retain the loyalties of long-standing fans (I’m one of those, I go back to the Troughton era) and to attract new fans.  If the change makes some fearful about the future success of the show, I genuinely sympathise even if I don’t share that view, but surely all we can do is to wait and see.

    Warriors? Hmm, surely not.

    Not being  a member of the ‘sisterhood’ – could this be a female version of the masons –  I too want the show to go forth and prosper, but not with a female Doctor. It may or may not work, who can tell, but people like me don’t have to like it. Trouble is, I have never liked JW and my OH can prove it.

    @lisa:  So what’ s wrong with sex   :)      My take is the Doctors can have any

    kind of relationship that they want to and we will all gain from their perspective .

    What ‘s wrong with it? This is basically a childrens show, if you want sex there are plenty of shows around where this ‘activity’ features greatly. The joy of DW is that there isn’t any swearing or sex.

    @mirime:  My little boy is only four and has watched a few First Doctor episodes, seen clips on YouTube (he loves Clara) and has played with my Lego Tardis. He’s seen the new Doctor and made no comment at all on her being a woman.

    At four years old, he probably doesn’t care being new to it.

    @wolfweed:

    I’m with Peter Davison!

    @antaus:   Personally I don’t think ALL feminists or SJWs are bad. I think there are people in both groups that see the wrongs and ills of society and do want to change them for the better. My major malfunction is with the people who run the organizations because from the experiences I’ve had, I don’t see them as having the best interest of the people at heart. I may be wrong but I don’t feel that way.

    That’s makes at least two of us. what puzzles me is why these people agree to being called ‘guys’ and ‘actors?’ surely that is sexist?

    @jimthefish:  It’s going to be interesting to see how CC deals with this now that the Doctor is a woman. It’d be fun to see River return but I highly doubt she will. It’s unlikely that CC will want to use SM’s characters, any more than SM had any interest in using RTDs.

    Not if CC has any sense. Alex Kingston would act JW off the screen.

    I read an article recently, where it stated that the BBC were swapping male presenters for female presenters because they didn’t have to pay them so much. Charming aren’t they. However, perhaps they have decided to try the same thing with Doctor Who, and save some money. *she says cynically* A friend also told me that JW is politically active? The friend  watches DW with her husband – he’s the fan – so has no axe to grind. Neither of them like the idea of a female Doctor either. Is anyone in any doubt that I’m against the idea? *rolls eyes*

    Missy

     

    #61605
    Missy @missy

    @wolfweed:

    Thank goodness Kris Marshall won’t be the new companion – I hope. It would dash his chances of ever becoming the Doctor.

    Missy

    #61606
    Missy @missy

    A thought occurred . So just to make my feelings clear. I am against a female Doctor, but as I have no say in the matter and it’s inevitable, they could at least have nade a better choice. I do not hate JW, she can act – although always as herself – but she isn’t in the same class as Olivia Colman, Tilda Swinton or Nicola Walker, that’s my point. Not that any  of these wonderful actressess would have been available.

    Missy

    #61610
    JimTheFish @jimthefish
    Time Lord

    @missy–

    Not sure why JW being politically active should count for or against her. Quite apart from anything else, you could say the same thing for Christopher Eccleston and David Tennant for that matter.

    However, perhaps they have decided to try the same thing with Doctor Who, and save some money. *she says cynically*

    You surely can’t have missed all the furore over the gender pay gap at the BBC. Or the news that JW is going to receive the same pay rate as Capaldi did.

    Thank goodness Kris Marshall won’t be the new companion – I hope. It would dash his chances of ever becoming the Doctor.

    Frankly, given all the grief he’s got over the past few months, I don’t think KM would touch Who with a bargepole now.

    Also not sure you can berate JW for ‘only acting as herself’ (not true, I suggest you check out Attack the Block or Adult Life Skills) and then offer up Tilda Swinton as an alternative.

    But I think we’re at the point now where some people think JW will be great, some have doubts, but really the only courteous thing to do is reserve judgement and give her the benefit of the doubt — just as you would with anybody about to start a new job.

    #61628
    ichabod @ichabod

    @missy   I do not hate JW, she can act – although always as herself – but she isn’t in the same class as Olivia Colman, Tilda Swinton or Nicola Walker, that’s my point. 

    Ha, funny — I don’t remember JW from Broadchurch, or in fact any of the other things I’ve seen her in; but I really didn’t like Olivia Coleman, and would have been grumpy if she’d been chosen to play the Doctor instead of JW.  It’s nothing I can put my finger on, just a visceral reaction to a total stranger, but all actors have to resign themselves to the unaccountable fickleness of audiences.  I thought Swinton would be an interesting choice, but never imagined she’d be interested at this stage of her career.  Actually, I’d rather see her take on the role with another decade of age on her, but that’s all fantasy.

    Missy, what do you mean by JW being “an activist”?  I’d never heard of her being anything notably public on behalf of any political position, and all I can think of is that she did say early on after the choice was made public that she’s “a feminist”.  Does calling yourself a feminist = being “an activist” in your view?  Or is JW well known for displaying the “act” part of “activist”?  Links would be appreciated, if you’ve got some.

    And then there’s this, from @jimthefish:  Not sure why JW being politically active should count for or against her. Quite apart from anything else, you could say the same thing for Christopher Eccleston and David Tennant for that matter.

    Makes no clear sense to me, either.

     

    #61633
    Missy @missy

    <span class=”useratname”>@jimthefish</span>Time Lord:

    I’ve seen her in : Tess of the D’Urbervilles, Accused, Cranford and all three series of Broadchurch. Before we knew that PC wasn’t going to do a fourth series, and before JW had been chosen, I’d told my OH that she irritated the hell out of me. The two you mentioned I’ve never heard of. You could be right baout KM- if he was offered the part. Very noble sentiments, and normally I’d agree, but as I don’t like the woman, it makes your suggestion very difficult.

    @ichabod:

    As to the politically active, I was told this by a friend. She likes DW, but not as much as her husband. One assumes (shouldn’t assume) that she meant that JW is politically outspoken – but I’ll ask for details. Benedict Cumberbatch is too, and most of his opinions I don’t agree with, but he is still on the top of my list.

    Missy

    #61636
    Charlie Cook @cookgroom

    “… Some characters should not be messed with ( James Bond, Captain Kirk, Sherlock Holmes, Doctor Who and so on).”

     

    Just being mischievous here, but Captain Kirk WAS a woman in one episode (although to be fair it wasn’t that great!) 🙂

    #61638
    Cath Annabel @cathannabel

    @missy In referring to Social Justice Warriors I was merely using @antaus term – not one I use myself, and one that’s intended as far as I can tell to disparage those of a leftist tendency who go on about issues of equality, sexism, racism etc.  In so far as that is what it means, I have to acknowledge that I am myself of a leftist tendency and tend (as those who read my blog will know) to go on about issues of equality, sexism, racism etc.  Guilty as charged, m’lud. The term ‘warrior’ is I am sure intended in a mocking way rather than in any literal sense to suggest that SJWs actually take up arms in support of their cause.

    I’m a bit puzzled about the ‘organisations’ that @antaus mentions (as per your quote) – any examples as to which organisations are being referred to?  As for the ‘sisterhood’, I’m not sure what you mean by that either.  In my experience those who call themselves feminists (both female and male) vary enormously in their views on specific issues, and in their politics generally.  There’s no specific creed to which we pledge allegiance, and what unites us is really very simple, the belief that no one should be treated detrimentally because of their gender and that society (ours and most others) historically (and in many places and situations currently) does just that.

    Re the use of ‘actors’ – this is not in my view sexism.  The word originally means someone who undertakes the profession of actor.  Actors (eg on the Shakespearian stage) were all male, and so the word was assumed to mean only men who undertake that profession, but it’s doesn’t have to, and many female actors prefer to just use the term for the profession (see also author, sculptor, and many others) rather than one that defines them by their gender.  Guys – well, that’s just a slang term which may have started off meaning men but is now used to mean people generally.  Where’s the problem with that?  After all, feminists have been told for generations that we should not feel excluded by the use of the term ‘men’, ‘mankind’ etc to mean human beings as the term includes women (except of course when it doesn’t….)

    It’s disappointing to read that you don’t want the show to do well with a female doctor.  That seems harsh on JW (whatever you think of her abilities), on CC who’s launching his term as showrunner with her in the role – and on the rest of us, some of whom welcome JW, others of whom at least are willing to keep open minds and see how it goes, but all of whom (I assume) want the show to go on.  I can’t understand why anyone who cares about Who would want it to fail.  Perhaps I misunderstood you, I hope so.

     

     

    #61639
    wolfweed @wolfweed

    @All…….

    In case you missed it over on the news thread…

    Jodie Whittaker will join Shaun Keaveny on BBC Radio 6 Monday, August 7, 9:00 a.m. GMT

    jw

    #61650
    Anonymous @

    I think  it’s great that Jodie Whitakker is politically active. Dad is. My Mum is -when she can. And I am too.

    We need political activism -I mean that’s how democracy started! people acting politically in their towns and cities in order to be noticed. Women got the vote thru activism -carrying placards, annoying the parliamentarians etc.

    If we really hate politicians and hate politics then in many cases we have ourselves to blame. Taking part in politics creates change that can be lasting. Peter Capaldi himself is a political activist and I’m sure you like PC @missy!

    I also like JW and have seen her in a few things. I wasn’t fond of Broadchurch but that wasn’t because of her. I didn’t like ‘Rory’ in the role he played either! -that just my opinion of it though.

    If there’s a sisterhood, I’m a bloke and am part of it too. Feminism rocks but the worst thing, mum was saying , is that if you read some of the American press all the work done by female authors, speakers and politicians has regressed or been ‘covered up’ which proves that the fight for equality can never ever stop. We can’t give  an inch!

    From Thane

Viewing 50 posts - 451 through 500 (of 547 total)

The topic ‘Jodie Whittaker announced as the new, 13th Doctor’ is closed to new replies.