Jodie Whittaker announced as the new, 13th Doctor
17 July 2017 at 21:57 #60973winston @winston
@all Just saw JW chosen as next Doctor and it is about time. So the 13th is female looking , so what? The Doctor is an alien and the regen process can be tricky sometimes not to mention that a Timelord can choose the next face. She is still The Doctor with all the memories, skills and experiences of her past regenerations. I will be looking forward to seeing how this new Doctor is like those that came before.
The 10th Doctor told Rose that regeneration was “a bit dodgey” and that he could have “2 heads or no head” so at least the 13th Doctor seems to have only the one head. Good enough for me ,now we just have to wait….17 July 2017 at 22:03 #60974chickenelly @chickenelly
Signing back in for my yearly check in. I have to say I was rather nervous about who it was going to be (thinks “please not Kris Marshall”) and was checking the news on my phone as I was out for the day.
Having not seen Jodie in anything, I’m rather looking forward to it. Whilst I’m a big fan of Capaldi’s, I found last year’s series a bit samey (although I enjoyed this series). A nice change to shake stuff up hopefully.17 July 2017 at 22:22 #60975
@frostfair – I agree that it will not be ignored. Indeed, it is the elephant in the room, so to speak. I only meant that I don’t think the Doctor’s gender switcheroo will impede her in any meaningful way.17 July 2017 at 22:44 #60976genek1953 @genek1953
I am much more anxiously awaiting some insight into how Chris Chibnall sees the new Doctor.
People often make a big thing about changes in Doctor Who actors, but over the many decades it seems to me that changing Doctor Who showrunners has had a much larger effect on the nature and quality of Who. All of the Doctors I didn’t care much for were during the same era, which long ago led me to conclude that it was really John Nathan-Turner who was primarily responsible for most of my discontents.17 July 2017 at 23:24 #60977Whisht @whisht
Not much time at present to add anything of value to the news.
I’ve not seen Jodie Whittaker in any role so have no expectations (not seen Broadchurch either).
Maybe will re-watch some Chibnall eps while I wait for Christmas!!
Have no qualms with a female Doctor. My only qualm would be if Chiball is awful or it is a miscast, then some people may view the decision to have a female Doctor as the ‘problem’ when in fact it isn’t.17 July 2017 at 23:34 #60978
Look on twitter to see the theories. Truly Bonkers.
"Newly Female Time Lord X is the Rani", is now officially the denialist fan's theme throughout BOTH the Capaldi and Whittaker eras. Sigh… https://t.co/byi4ktAVow
— Dominic G. Martin (@DominicJGM) July 17, 2017
She wore a hoodie once, so it must be true…18 July 2017 at 00:18 #60979AlexWho @alexwho
Never heard of her before but good luck to Jodie!
Hope the show continues to have success.18 July 2017 at 01:46 #60980tardigrade @tardigrade
Does the Doctor now have existential angst not knowing how many regenerations he has left, I wonder? Or has he now got all the regeneration energy of all Time Lords no longer around, and is effectively immortal…
If anything the angst appears to stem from not knowing how much more change he can go through, rather than a more conventional existential angst of impending mortality. The uncertainty is a problem anyway.
I thought the outfit was meant to be similar to Twelves, as in the regeneration had just happened because the coat and hoody looked too big on her – like Tennant in Eccleston’s leather jacket.
That’s certainly possible. A newly regenerated Doctor can take time to establish their own look. The more I think about it though, the more I like the idea of the new Doctor not necessarily having one iconic look, or at least departing from it much more freely. I wouldn’t be wanting to see a particularly quirky look, and from what I’ve heard, that’s not likely to be Jodie Whittaker’s style anyway.
I feel sry for the 6th doctor, I met Colin Baker a few yrs ago, what a lovely man he is
Is he facing some issue I don’t know about? I struggled with much of his term as the Doctor, but that was mostly due to the writing and companions of the period. I never assumed his “Doctor” personality was his own.
A very sad day… Been watching dr who since I was 4yrs old, my first doctor being the late great Jon Pertwee, never missed an episode in all that time. The doctor has defeated many foes but alas could not beat the bbc’s political correct agenda… I wont be watching anymore
A fan of similar longevity here. I can remember Jon Pertwee regenerating and not knowing whether things would be the same, only to be enchanted by Tom Baker’s irrepressible Doctor. And then when he left the role after so long, feeling the same again. And yet the show continued finding new directions.
I was worried about David Tenant leaving the role, after making the role his own, only again to see Matt Smith step in and himself do a wonderful job, and then feeling worried about Peter Capaldi stepping into the role, and having those worries promptly assuaged, when it was clear it was in capable hands. There’s been a good record of casting for the role, and as a result, I now have a good deal of trust that the new casting is delivering an actor who’ll do justice to the role, and opening that role up to a wider pool of actors can, I think, only be a good thing.
The program you’ve watched for all that time will survive another regeneration, and there’s every possibility that it will be all the stronger for it. I hope that many who are expressing concerns at the casting will continue to give the show a chance.
I really don’t see this as part of any agenda, driven top-down, but rather a bottom-up decision from the creative team, who saw the opportunity to cast an actor who can bring something new to the role and open up new creative directions.18 July 2017 at 05:29 #60981
After more time to stew on this it seems the simple feeding of attention to the haters is viral and wrong. This is not feminism. It is not a political agenda. It is an expected adjustment in a fictional TV programe to a fictional character that has flat out said we should expect anything from the actor playing the main character. Why is there a controversy?
Don’t feed it.18 July 2017 at 05:37 #60982
All — I was in Boston over the weekend for a convention snoozing and going to SF panels, and only found out today, when I opened the papers this morning on the way to the airport. I wasn’t sure how I really felt about the possibility of a female #13 — apart from a somewhat distanced, probably stuffy approval on gender politics grounds, before, because I didn’t think there was a snow-ball’s chance in hell. But this a.m. I found out how I *really* feel.
You could have heard my “Yippeeeeeeee!” all the way to Albuquerque, before I ever got on the plane.
Just the idea that the BBC did it, and by Garm kept it a secret, was a thrill. They’re not the Gnarly Gnomes of Edwardia after all!
Thrilled. Absolutely. Wow!
Just got home, will read everything tomorrow, but I just wanted to say how absolutely chuffed I am by this, and eager to see what everybody else has had to say. Night, night!18 July 2017 at 05:52 #60983Missy @missy
At a quick glance, feeings appear mixed. I shall read all posts later. Good to see that the /my Doctor is still on the title page, at least until after the Christmas special.18 July 2017 at 05:58 #60984
@missrori @mirime YES, with you on that — the only way to follow Capaldi was with something as cool in its own way as the wild-haired Scotsman with the hearts of two lions (well, a lion and a lioness, clearly). And this woman looks up to the job, though I know nothing about her.
For those cut to their own hearts by this choice, here’s an opportunity to follow the style of our hero — open minds, hopeful anticipation, and, above all — kindness.18 July 2017 at 06:00 #60985
My prediction is that in 20 minutes into the first episode of season 11; we will be confident that Jodie is our Doctor without doubt.18 July 2017 at 06:19 #60986blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave
Been scanning the comments, and wondering…why is this still an issue?
It’s happened. It’s exciting. it’s new phase of Who.
Why aren’t we coming up with bonkers theories about S11?
So. Maybe we could move off this thread and move onto a thread about the possible directions for S11.
Just a suggestion.18 July 2017 at 06:26 #6098718 July 2017 at 07:08 #60988
@cathannabel ” . . . the Doctor should never be a figure for sexual fantasy, to which the response from a woman was ‘Mate, I’ve got terrible news for you…’
Ah, what laugh! Thanks for that. Isn’t it strange, when some men still think that not only is sexual fantasy their exclusive playground, but that TV exists only to cater to the boys in that playground. You’d think fanfic had never been invented . . . Remember Capaldi reading out loud from a bit of fan fic and checking, “There’s nothing — sassy in here, is therer?” which got a huge laugh from the audience, because . . . well — I was just at a panel on fanfic in Boston, at which the point was made that one of the things that fanfic does (among many others) is to declare the legitimacy of female’s sexual fantasy as equal to that of males.18 July 2017 at 08:05 #60989
@gwladys24 My only issue is whether this development is consistent with the Doctor’s backstory, as far as we think we know it.
As we know it, though, has been expanded to include possibilities not previously made explicit: when CapDoc tells Bill about the Master as his “man crush”, he added that he might have been female then, can’t remember; and was he female, or some kind of veggie-sexed person when “There was an algae king who fancied me once.” The Doctor’s backstory is by its nature (TV fantasy fiction) infinitely expandable and variable, provided that he retains his core values of doing right for its own sake and being kind at heart(s). Seriously, I wouldn’t worry.
The question of just *how* the new Doctor will be a female person is going to be hugely controversial no matter how it is handled. If JW were to play a flirty, moody, openly sentimental, impulsive (etc., all the assumption, both pos. and neg., of sexual essentialism) Doctor, feminists (like me) would be up in arms (is that all you think there is to being a woman, you dolts, that sexist caricature, that trivializing cartoon?). If JW were to play a “mannish” woman, some would charge that she’s a masculine idea of a lesbian or even a dominatrix, with the Tardis as her dungeon. If JW plays the Doctor as asexual — that would be very interesting, since male actors have done that previously with nobody squawking much about it that I’ve seen; and female fans (not just feminists, of whatever gender) might well object, “You’re cheating — what’s the point of having a female Doctor if she’s exactly like a *male* Doctor?
And many finer shades of discontent in between, as things develop. Frankly, I think this is excellent. This sort of conversation (within the program, and among its viewers) is exactly what the knee-jerk-I’mnotasexistbutt brigade want NOT to take place, ever, anywhere, but especially not on Their Show. But it’s the conversation humanity is, at long last beginning to insist on having, because the old essentialist assumptions are starrting to crack and lose their authority at last, in the real world. The idea that they can (or should) still be applied to stories about a universe populated by sentient fluids, zygons, and gods know what, let alone travelers among them all, is just ludicrous, IMO. The change in rigid divisions and attributes to this or that class of persons is part of the future that was waiting for us, and now it’s here — with automation, cyborgs, genetic modification and science, nano tech, and all the rest.
DW stays vital and relevant by engaging with it, not by closing its eyes and pretending that nothing has changed. I came across a comment recently to the effect that this change has already happened, and is spreading globally, but that very old, deep-rooted patriarchal values are sure as Hell not going to give up without a fight. Well, we’re in the middle of that fight right now (very obviously in the US, given the knuckle-dragging crew in the White House, but similarly elsewhere if you keep an eye on the international news). How can DW mean anything to modern people without acknowledging that basic change, not ducking it? They don’t have to wade in gun blazing (the Doctor doesn’t like guns), but there are other ways, and yes, they have; the moment has been prepared for.
I’m proud of the show and its people for jumping in the deep end of the pool. I didn’t think the BBC had the guts to really go for it, to tell the truth. However they manage from here on, I salute them for proving me wrong.
Great post, @greyhoundjon, and welcome!18 July 2017 at 08:17 #60990
@mirime Good point about your mum. I’m within uncomfortably more than squinting distance of 80, myself, and the more I think about it, the more I love the idea of HW following Capaldi (an older Doctor, unstable, real ice as well as real fire); no point shaking up the dice if you’re not going to throw the things!18 July 2017 at 08:58 #60991genek1953 @genek1953
@ichabod…If JW were to play a flirty, moody, openly sentimental, impulsive (etc., all the assumption, both pos. and neg., of sexual essentialism) Doctor…
It didn’t especially bother me when David Tennant and Matt Smith did that, but it would be better for the new Doctor to be, well, newer.18 July 2017 at 09:44 #60992Serahni @serahni
I have decided that what I’m actually hoping for, after all this outcry, is that The Doctor asserts the identity he’s always had and demands to be considered male, despite appearances. Admittedly, this is because I feel like people who are protesting from a viewpoint of extreme misogyny would be utterly furious to discover this isn’t a feminist agenda, but that damn liberal media and their ramblings about gender identity! Still, we know The Doctor is quite comfortable being referred to as “him”. Why should that change? I don’t think they’d go down this path, and it could be for the best since it might get tedious having to correct every second person that turns up on screen, but in the privacy of my own malicious fantasies, this is a thing.18 July 2017 at 10:23 #60993janetteB @janetteb
@blenkinsopthebrave and celebrate the decision by doing a watch of some of Jodie’s earlier work and perhaps a retrospective of Chibnell’s Who scripts to date. I think we may have started the later but it stalled though I guess we have a good part of next year for that.
Janette18 July 2017 at 11:10 #60994Craig @craigEmperor
I will, indeed, reinstate the Chris Chibnall retrospective. I kinda decided it was a bit too early before.
Do you think it should be soon, or after Christmas?
Also, in response to Blenkinsop I thought I should maybe start a discussion topic on “The Chibnall Era: What do you think it will bring?” But when should I start that? Right now, or after Christmas?
What do others think?
Definitely after Christmas I’ll be encouraging some viewings of Jodie Whittaker’s work – maybe not all of Broadchurch but probably “Attack The Block” and her “Black Mirror” episode (unless people want to discuss Broadchurch – although I’m not doing 24 episodes week by week – maybe three topics, one for each season) 🙂18 July 2017 at 11:23 #60995Anonymous @
I was getting bored with this sir. 🙂 But honestly, yes I mentioned my age because my 15 year old mates -girls particularly, are thrilled to see JW-we’re the new (re)generation. It’s effectively for us! 😀
I was referring to The Doctor, notthe supporting characters – perhaps you missed that. As for ‘onwards and upwards’, I would say that Dr Who has been circling the plughole for some time and is now headed downwards. Only time will tell. I am sure the same viewing trends will be seen on IPlayer, ITunes etc.
And I have no idea why you need to mention your age. Is it relevant – or are you suggesting mine is?
If I “missed” something (you refer to it as “that”) it’s because it wasn’t explained.
So, lastly you complain that I haven’t highlighted the contradictions: I did exactly that. I took your paragraph and showed you. You speak, officiously, of being a writer of “the subjugation of women in celluloid roles” and honestly? There’s lots of academia staring right at you here- you don’t need to “pontificate” on your credentials. We can take your Masters and show you a PhD 🙂 (Mum and I are often on the site together: her less so now for various reasons).
Anyway, all in good fun. But back to these contradictions. I expect we agree more than disagree. The issue could be that the particular actress might not be appropriate? Or is it, as you say, that the show has been “circling the plug hole” for a long time?
Perhaps what I was attempting to say is that if you have knowledge regarding the poor roles for women in the last few decades, then it strikes me as odd that you feel the Doctor must therefore forever be a man: surely this actor’s credentials (like your own) are the tipping point for success?
Ultimately the show’s ratings have little to do with overnights and other %. The show is actually bigger than it ever was -look at Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and the Balkans: huge success rates and people of my mother’s generation who know Peter Capaldi from other television respect him enormously. Watching with mum, episodes like The Empty Child and The Satan Pit (all Moffat creations) as well as the fantastic Weeping Angels demonstrate that the last 10 years have provided us with better monsters, scarier ‘behind the sofa scenes’, fantastic, witty and clever dialogue which pulls at the heartstrings much like Buffy did and even House (whilst not a fantasy -at least not in our heads!).
So, no, I have no ire toward you, at all! Forgive me if it came across that way? It was a general discussion about how certain groups pillory particular shows or actors in those moments. A dignified discussion -where age actually IS appropriate (it’s good for you to know us! To know I’m 15 and what a person of my age might actually think. It helps keep the Forum open and honest, imho).
But anyways, if the show has been “circling the plug hole” for you (not for others, maybe) there are, indeed, other beautiful programmes to watch -Anne of Green Gables is something Mum really likes -it’s lovely. Not for me, though.
Thane.18 July 2017 at 11:25 #60996
Loved your account of being at a convention and finding out about Whittaker’s casting at the end of the weekend. Presumably it wasn’t a Who convention, or someone would have announced it there. It’s great to feel this delighted, isn’t it.
Like you, I am rather dizzy that the BBC really went for it. Even though all the hints had been telegraphed in the text for a while now, I still wasn’t sure they’d dare.
I am particularly excited to think about all the kids for whom the Doctor is Capaldi, and who will be watching the Doc regenerate for the first time. What a wonderful added dimension of extra-terrestriality to feed to their imaginations.
It throws up so much, as you say. Maybe the Doc will decide that having done 12 regenerations in a male presenting body, it’s time to do 12 in female presenting ones. Wouldn’t that put the cat among the pigeons. I would very much like for a female regeneration not to be a “quirky” one-off.
@craig – I’d quite like a Capaldi retrospective space too, if poss? I feel that his tenure has been under appreciated, perhaps because it has coincided with Moffat winding down, and I want to celebrate him a bit before he regenerates.18 July 2017 at 11:26 #60997JimTheFish @jimthefishTime Lord
@craig — Just watched Adult Life Skills this week and it’s great. What’s more, JW is great in it too. Well worth a watch. I think some discussion of JW’s work is a great idea, though maybe we should just treat Broadchurch as one entity and people can discuss whatever aspects of it they wish to within that?
Personally, I think it’s too early for the Chibbers retrospective and we should give SM his last six months in the sun first. Don’t know what others think. How about a s10 retrospective blog/thread which will give everyone somewhere to bonkerise in the run-up to Christmas?18 July 2017 at 12:13 #60998GlasgowBoy @glasgowboy
@thayne15 and @jimthefish
Like Thayne I am becoming bored with this but there is something I need to mention. Jimthefish appears to have made quite appalling assumptions about me. I mentioned the thesis, not as a way of bragging, but as a defence of those who would assume I was some sort of sexist moron. I made comment that those who disagree with the latest casting are made to feel that they need to prove they are not sexist before they can comment. You request that I post a link suggests that you think I am such a person and need to prove otherwise. Either that or I will be judged by you. I think I’ll pass on the link, thank you. Don’t want to let any lurking keyboard trolls into my professional or family life. I was annoyed with that, but that was ok. The bit that followed was not.
“It doesn’t mean you’re not operating under sexist assumptions now. Frankly, this statement of yours sounds like it falls suspiciously into the ‘but some of my best friends are black’ camp argument”.
That is offensive. You are making a completely unsupported and incorrect suggestion that I am sexist. Then you’ve thrown in a little nod towards racism too. This is not acceptable. May I remind you of the etiquette of this forum – something you yourself posted about on this thread:
“Personal attacks on members of the forum are not welcome…..Just because you don’t agree with someone doesn’t mean doesn’t mean that they’re stupid or Hitler”.
I could add “or sexist”. Perhaps you’d like to withdraw your comment and apologise? Either that or change the wording about making personal attacks to include “except when it comes to me”.
You go on about the liberal values of Dr Who and this forum and yet show intolerance of anyone who disagrees with you. Do I need to remind you that the definition of tolerance is “the ability or willingness to tolerate the existence of opinions or behaviour that one dislikes or disagrees with”. Or perhaps you’d like to add “except when it comes to me ” on to that as well? I disagree with the casting of JW. Get over it.
Or is it a case of ‘all opinions are equal but some are more equal than others’?
@thayne15 I think we agree to disagree. Thank you for your comments, much appreciated.
Finally (for I have no intention of posting after this) does anyone know the answer to my question? How long has JW been contracted for? If it is only one series then it looks like the BBC are hedging their bets and do not have the courage of their convictions.18 July 2017 at 12:23 #60999
I’m pretty sure that Doctor actors are usually contracted on a year by year basis.
Nothing to do with conviction, just standard.18 July 2017 at 12:44 #61000JimTheFish @jimthefishTime Lord
@glasgowboy — I argued against your arguments above and I don’t think I need to do so again. You have provided no arguments to support your position except ‘I think JW will be bad so there.’ And ‘I wrote a thesis once’ is not an argument or a defence. You should presumably know that if you’ve actually had any kind of thesis submitted for peer review. And for the record, I didn’t call you sexist or racist. I suggested you were possibly operating from sexist assumptions because you have offered no real argument to support your stance beyond ‘JW baaaaad’.
And everyone is welcome here and no opinion is more privileged than anyone else. But everyone is expected to argue their case or at least give some kind reasoning. Myself and others have engage with your points and offered a counter view. That’s not you being dismissed as sexist or anything else. That’s you being accepted as part of the community and engaging with your points. There’s lots of debate on this site but it is for the large part courteous and it is considered. I’d argue that, while you’ve done that on other other threads and you clearly haven’t done it here. Saying ‘I think this. Get over it’ is not an option.
But really no one’s called you sexist, misogynist or anything. Your attitude on this thread has been a combative and defensive one which amounted to a kneejerk dislike of the casting and preemptively accusing who challenges your view as dismissing you as a misogynist. It’s classic Trump-ism, actually. But really no one has actually done that. They’ve engaged with you, disagreed with you and then continued the general discussion.
(And I mentioned the etiquette above as I am one of the site’s mods and keeping that kind of thing to a minimum is one of the things I do here. For the record, I don’t consider anything I’ve posted above to contravene our site rules but I do consider some of your remarks to @Thane15 to come pretty close to it.)
And as @wolfweed says, all Doctors are, at least initially, put on one-year contracts. That’s been standard for every actor to take the part. Faith or lack thereof doesn’t enter into it.
18 July 2017 at 14:31 #61005
- This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by JimTheFish. Reason: edited for balance
This will get a proper discussion thread soon enough but until then here’s:
Black Mirror – the entire history of you (Contains ‘adult’ material)18 July 2017 at 14:39 #61006Cath Annabel @cathannabel
@juniperfish I’m just in the process of writing a blog piece about the new Doctor and wondered if you would be ok with me quoting you:
A plethora of girls and women have regarded the Doctor as a role model, and identified with him, over Doctor Who’s 50 year span, whilst he’s regenerated, repeatedly, as a man. The Doctor is still, no doubt, going to be the Doctor as portrayed by Jodie Whittaker – alien, two hearts, both of gold, funny, witty, snarky, capricious, kind, adventurous.
Happy to send you the full draft so you can be sure I’m not doing you any injustice in terms of context etc. Also if you are OK with me quoting you (and do feel free to say no if you’d rather I didn’t), shall I credit you with your Forum avatar?
Thanks!18 July 2017 at 14:55 #61007
There is no requirement to love Whittaker’s casting (although, as she hasn’t yet uttered a single line of dialogue as the Doctor, judgement on merit seems premature).
You write, “At the moment it [Doctor Who] is nothing less than a column in the Guardian. Dr Who has been replaced by Doctor Right On.”
This is a perennial moan in certain parts of the interwebs, but what does it actually mean?
Since RTD revived the show, the Doctor has travelled with a greater variety of companions in terms of ethnicity and sexual orientation than in days of yore. Is that what is meant by “right on”, clearly here understood as something to be decried?
Logically, that suggests posters making this complaint about “right on-ness” would prefer a return to the all white, all heterosexual (ostensibly – although plenty of people read Adric as LGBT) companions of the first four decades of Who.
This seems to me to be nothing other than a refusal to recognise the full humanity of others, so that Bill Potts, for example, becomes a “black lesbian” (and disliked “right on” cypher) rather than an amazing person and companion who happens to be black and to prefer girls.
Capaldi’s Doctor found something wonderful about Bill. She was a bright student, with a spark of adventure and a quick way of thinking which interested him. He didn’t give a damn that she was black or that she was a lesbian. But neither did he refuse to see those elements of her being. She was, to him, a human he thought worthy of inviting on adventures in the TARDIS.
If “Doctor Right On” does not mean, “I dislike Nu Who’s greater diversity of companions, and now its greater diversity of Doctor-by-gender” I would love to know what it does mean.
Planet Earth (and Britain) is diverse. Gallifrey is an alien and highly advanced culture whose people’s biology is different from that of humans. Nu Who is simply doing a better job of representing that than Old Who did.18 July 2017 at 14:56 #61008
@cathannabel – of course – always delighted to be quoted 🙂
Look forward to reading it.18 July 2017 at 15:06 #61009
@blenkinsopthebrave – Why aren’t we coming up with bonkers theories about S11?
Capital idea! OK, here goes:
18 July 2017 at 15:20 #61010
- The S11 premiere will have to deal with the elephant in the room. The difficulty, however, is that the Doctor is now thoroughly alone with no one to say “you’ve changed!” — no Bill, no Nardole, no Missy, etc. She can’t go immediately to Vastra & Jenny, because that would be a copy of Twelve’s first episode. So my bonkers theory would be that the Doctor gets halfway through the episode before realizing she’s a woman – she meets new people, runs away from monsters, generally does Doctor-y stuff, and suddenly catches sight of herself in the mirror.
- The Doctor somehow learns of Missy’s death and is distraught. She travels through the Master’s timeline to try to prevent it somehow, and learns that the Simm-Master does NOT regenerate into Missy (she’s further down the regeneration line, apparently) but into someone entirely different. I vote Chiwetel Ejiofor, playing creepy efficiency as in Serenity.
- New companions are a teenage girl and her father. Daughter is brilliant but surly, sees the Doctor as everything she wants to grow up to be. Dad starts out as a daft mansplainer, ultimately learns to keep his mouth shut.
Looool at Dad as a “daft mansplainer” – haha – I’m not sure CC is as much of a troll as Moffat, however, although I would enjoy this a lot.
I do hope Jenny and Vastra are revisted at some point. I love them.
My guess is that Doctor 12 will be with Doctor 1 at the time of his regeneration into Doctor 13. So we’ll get a very brusque, “Stop dilly dallying about staring at yourself in the mirror for heaven’s sake. Be thankful you’ve lost the eyebrows and let’s get a move on!” from Doctor 1.18 July 2017 at 15:22 #61011Mirime @mirime
So my bonkers theory would be that the Doctor gets halfway through the episode before realizing she’s a woman
@drben I would seriously love it if that happened!
I wonder if Missy will stay female. Either way if s/he shows up while the Doctor is a woman I can see some mickey-taking of how s/he did it first.18 July 2017 at 15:46 #61012
@juniperfish – That would be fun. A lot of “my dear girl” and so on. I have also missed Vastra and Jenny — I still very much want a “Paternoster Gang” spin-off series. Clara and Ashildr could show up in their Diner-TARDIS for the occasional cameo.
@mirime – I suspect we’ve seen the last of Missy (in that form, at least) but boy would that be fun. Missy would surely play up the “two best girlfriends” aspect for laughs, just to irritate the Doctor.
Missy: Want to borrow my eyeliner?
Doctor: Shut up.
Missy: Really, that coat is doing nothing for your figure.
Doctor: Shut up.
Missy: Let’s have a sleepover – I’ll braid your hair and we can talk about boy bands.
Doctor: Shut up.18 July 2017 at 16:34 #61013Timmy @timmy9654
Yeah it’s a deal breaker for me I’m disappointed that they choose the Dr to be a female. Even though the Dr regenerates every few years he has always been a man I’m one disappointed fan. And will not watch the show again. I hope the best for the future of Dr who.18 July 2017 at 16:39 #61014
the only good thing to come from this is I have just made a small fortune selling off my police box and dalek…. and lots of great other sci fi coming out, with new star wars and guardians of the galaxy 218 July 2017 at 17:00 #6101518 July 2017 at 17:10 #61016
sry I didn’t realize that I wasn’t allowed an opinion18 July 2017 at 17:12 #61017
or is this a freedom of speech site as long as we all agree with your views craig??18 July 2017 at 17:15 #61018Devilishrobby @devilishrobby
Well the announcement of JW as the next Doctor has caused dissension in the Devilish household 😭😢 when telling my partner about her appointment he said “well I won’t be watching it” when I asked him why he said the Doctor has always been a male and the change will lose the show viewers. Now whilst I may agree the show may lose some “fans” I think it will possibly gain even more as young girls who may have not been interested in science fantasy (I agree the show has never really been science fiction , but has always had a science element as part of its conception from the start as I understood). You only have to look at the young girls reaction that I caught on YouTube, sorry can’t post a link, to understand that there will be a whole new generation of viewers who will be more likely to watch the show as it will be seen as less of a boys show. Now if this is political correctness well I find I can go along with it as it may just in the long run garauntee the survival of the show. Keeping something a certain way just for the sake of keeping the status quo leads to stagnation to grow you need evolution and I feeel that is what the show has done since the restart AG.18 July 2017 at 17:20 #61019pıtırcapaldi @pitircapaldi
I thınk new series exciting for us because we watched only men doctor last 10 season18 July 2017 at 17:21 #61020Devilishrobby @devilishrobby
@ holly110 that was uncalled for this site since I joined several years ago has always stood for free speech all that Craig has stipulated is that if you disagree you be polite about it and preferably you back up your view/argument all point with some kind of evidence.18 July 2017 at 17:28 #61021
sry was it impolite to say I have sold off my police box and dalek… I didn’t realize that would offend anyone…. I have been polite and made points that the shows history has been rewritten… good luck to Jodie, she was great in broadchurch but this show is dead to me now, I am just relieved that rae hasn’t suddenly become a man in star wars and that they don’t feel the need to do so18 July 2017 at 17:30 #61022
@holly110 – It’s more about knowing your audience. There are a ton of dark corners on the Internet where you can post about how much you hate this decision and how the show is ruined forever. A quick perusal of this site, however, reveals a membership of people who view Doctor Who with enthusiasm and hope, who acknowledge its shortcomings but nevertheless exult in the joy of fandom.
There is negativity and there is disagreement, for sure — most people didn’t like the episode where the Moon was an egg, for instance, and no one was shy about saying so — but it’s a community of people who generally give the show the benefit of the doubt and are generally excited to see what will happen next.
Maybe Whittaker will be a failure as the Doctor. Maybe Chibnall will be a crap showrunner. Maybe the writing will be terrible. I doubt it, but it’s possible. But all of that is in the future and “I’m taking my ball and going home” comments are just unhelpful.18 July 2017 at 17:33 #61023MissRori @missrori
@ichabod Glad to hear you approve! 😉 Your comments are always so eloquent.
@midnight was one of the few U.S. shows to discuss the news and Chris Hardwick, the panelists, and the audience cheered the choice and, in their usual saucy way, pooh-poohed the detractors (highlighting the “complaints as episode titles” meme). It cheered me up. But it is important to be kind, as the Doctor would have it. S/he is a professor too after all, with much to teach. 🙂18 July 2017 at 17:36 #61024
Watch ‘Adult Life Skills’. It’s brilliant.18 July 2017 at 17:39 #61025
as I have previously stated I have watched this show since I was 4, starting with jp, DW was never about sexuality the first sign of it was when pm kissed grace in the movie but that was plutonic, I have loved this show for many yrs and yes I am displeased with what they have done, I feel strongly on this issue, enough to sell my beloved dalek and police box, I truly feel as if a lifelong friend has died and yes I am a little offended that certain posts here point at those with my view being “ist” of some kind, which I assure you I am not. I have fought for and served this country so that ppl can have a freedom of speech and feel that craigs post to me was an attack and offensive as I don’t agree with what he thinks18 July 2017 at 17:45 #61026The Meddling Monk @themadmonk
It is natural for there to be polarised views on something as major as this and the thing about Dr Who is that it has been about for a long time and is loved by many generations and by male and female audiences. I reserve my right to say that I feel this is a mistake and accept others will welcome the change but that is about choice and opinion.
Maybe the change will keep it fresh and attract new audiences and although I have enjoyed the last series they can not keep rolling out the same “monsters” so a kick start may open new doors and new adventures and directions and inject momentum.
Maybe its time to fix the chameleon circuit and loose the old police box as its hardly relevant to today’s modern audience as it was when the series started back in the 60’s.
Maybe its time to bring back K9 as a companion ?
The topic ‘Jodie Whittaker announced as the new, 13th Doctor’ is closed to new replies.