On The Sofa (4)
This topic contains 948 replies, has 86 voices, and was last updated by Anonymous 5 years, 9 months ago.
6 March 2014 at 14:10 #26168
@devilishrobby – Oh yikes, I didn’t think of that… it is kinda similar. But probably just a coincidence that they’re similar to the Gods of Ragnarok from ‘Greatest Show’ though. (Even though as I just stated, Family of Blood was originally a Seventh Doctor story.) That and there was only three in ‘Greatest Show’.6 March 2014 at 14:34 #26170
And about the 10th anniversary of New Who; I just hope, if we get a multi-Doctor story, that Eccleston will reprise his role of the Ninth Doctor for that. After all, he was the first Doctor of New Who.6 March 2014 at 14:45 #26171
ha ha given ecclestones recalitrance about even doing confrences it would surprise me if he will ever reprise his role as the ninth doctor. IMPO given the fandom of Who it should be written into the contracts of any future actor that takes the role will make themselves available for atleast one confrence a year and at least consider being available for a special. But thats only my opinion as a hardened fan lol. If I had my way Ecclestone would have been made to do at least 3 seasons before being released but then we wouldnt have had the wonderful Tennant doctor so hey ho.6 March 2014 at 15:03 #26172Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip
@devilishrobby – yes, I’m sure we’d have had a great two series with a deeply unhappy Eccleston being contractually trapped in the role. Much better David Tennant; a lot of his charm was how visibly delighted he was to be playing the Doctor.
And given the amount of money the actors can get on the conference circuit, I’d say Christopher Eccleston really doesn’t want to go to a Who conference. So why make him?
He’s an actor who did a job; because he was the first Doctor of the reboot (and hadn’t been a fan) he didn’t realise that The Doctor is a role for life, not just for the few years you’re playing it on the telly. He obviously didn’t enjoy his time on Who, and now he wants to move on.
Thing is, people won’t let him.6 March 2014 at 15:05 #26173Anonymous @
Eccleston is a well known professional grump but a great Doctor nonetheless. It amazes me that some actors take on such roles and then spend the rest of their careers trying to distance themselves from it. A lot of guest stars in Who try to gloss over their time on the programme. Bet they liked their fees though! On the other hand listen to some of the DVD commentaries- Janet Fielding and Peter Davison are hilarious and spend most of their time laughing at themselves.6 March 2014 at 15:11 #26174
Probably renegotiating their pay (upwards) each time, as well.
And quite right too 😉 I think both Tennant and Smith were reported as being on a payment escalator series by series. It’s actually a pretty good low risk model for both them and the BBC really. The BBC doesn’t particularly have to worry about waving a huge amount of dosh on a “name” who may turn out less than successful.
Glad to hear to worlds of Doctor Who Forum social activity continues apace.
But I will say this, the role of Richelieu is kind of integral to the Musketeers and Capaldi can’t do both really. Something’s going to have to be recast at some point.
I spotted this a while ago, a bit after the announcement. At the time of Capaldi being cast there had been no confirmation there would be a second series of Musketeers, as it depended upon reception. Basically they are responding by going in a different direction than the source material. To summarise:
Hodges also appeared to confirm that Capaldi’s Doctor Who commitments will rule him out of appearing in a potential second series of The Musketeers.
“[We’ll] have a kind of ‘series villain’ policy which I think will keep the show fresh,” he said.
Which will no doubt anger purists of the originals, but probably won’t trouble anyone who isn’t that familiar.
I think it’s interesting the way the BBC wove both Tennant and Smith into other productions while they were the Doctor in their first couple of years. I can imagine them discussing other projects exterior to Who with Capaldi that he wants to do as a sideline. Given his Writer & Director status, this could also include a couple of pet projects in that direction. I think the approach may help with itchy feet syndrome to a certain extent, and alleviate certain concerns that you may end up being pidgeon holed as The Doctor (even if your obituary will inevitably say..Former Doctor..). 😀6 March 2014 at 15:45 #26175Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip
some actors take on such roles and then spend the rest of their careers trying to distance themselves from it.
Actors take on a lot of roles. I once had to fill in one of those forms which ask you to list every single job you’ve had since leaving school. With dates. Since by that point I’d been a professional actor for twenty years, my response was along the lines of: ‘You have got to be kidding me!’
Anyway, the point is that actors take on a lot of roles and never know if any of them will suddenly become ‘the’ role, the one the general public thinks of when they hear that actor’s name or see their photo.
And sometimes, to their horror, ‘the’ role is the one they didn’t like. Either they had a rotten time on-set, so don’t want to remember it. Or they thought the script was shite and that they just did their best with it. Or even that they just did that particular job for the money and were a bit ashamed of it at the time … and now everyone prefers it to the jobs they’re really proud of.
And at every opportunity, people bring ‘the’ role up. They want to discuss it, they want you to come and give a talk about it, they want it to be the first line of your obituary…
… and then people get pissed off that the actor concerned would really rather not talk about ‘the’ role and would rather talk about all their other work. Any other work. For God’s sake, I hated that part! Why do you all want me to talk about it!
It’s like that. 😉6 March 2014 at 17:09 #26177
I think @bluesqueakpip is talking an awful lot of sense here. I recognise a lot of this from 80s fandom with Tom Baker. He refused an offer to come back for an anniversary and didn’t really engage much with fan events for a good period, and there were always some who held it against him. Fandom doesn’t own these people, and they should be allowed to live by their own rules.
Eccleston is well known for declining repeat or continuing work, and you’ll find joke comments about the saddest man in showbusiness being his agent littered around. Just after Who he appeared in the US series Heroes and turned down a very substantial offer to reprise his role of Claude in the second series (some might say wisely after the way it turned out). It may seem odd to some, but then again, some might celebrate him for seeking new challenges and not living off past glories.6 March 2014 at 17:14 #26178
Just out of interest following on from the earlier mention of next year – does anyone think much will be made of the 10th Anniversary of the return?
I can imagine there will be competing views on this. I can imagine BBC Worldwide thinking “ooh- another anniversary. Ideal to big up and sell more stuff”.
I can also imagine wiser heads explaining they’ve invested considerable resources into ensuring BG and AG Who are seen as a continuous property – which has just had a 50 year anniversary, so why create a notional division by having a 10th celebration? Personally I’d ere on the side of it being a lower key marketing event (10 year box sets, new special features, blah, blah) than anything bigger.6 March 2014 at 17:40 #26180Anonymous @
I had been expecting a low key celebration with Series 1 being repeated on BBC3 but obviously that’s not going to happen now.
I’m sure the Beeb will cobble together some sort of ‘greatest moments of New Who’ program.
That said, with the closure of BBC3, Auntie now has 30m to be spread across the remaining channels so they might spend some of that on a Special. The realist in me says they probably won’t but one can always hope.6 March 2014 at 17:46 #26181Anonymous @
Oops, I’d misread the report on BBC News. The £30m savings aren’t being spread across all BBC channels, just the Drama dept.6 March 2014 at 18:18 #26182
@phaseshift – Tom Baker regretted not being in the 20th anniversary special (‘The Five Doctors’) afterwards I’ve heard.6 March 2014 at 18:25 #26183Anonymous @
@phaseshift — Yeah, I doubt that they’ll go big guns on it coming so soon after the 50th. There will undoubtedly be a few box sets and what have you. Maybe we’ll get a low-ish key story with a previous Doc cameo thrown into the season somewhere a la Time Crash– maybe just Tennant (unlikely to be Smith so soon after he’s gone) or maybe McGann. But I think that’ll be your lot.6 March 2014 at 19:20 #26184
I agree there may be a multi doctor story incorporated into the season in 2015 perhaps like (and he gasps in the cringe-worthiness of the thought) the two doctor story, and I apologise the name escapes me, with Colin Baker and Patrick Troughton. You never know Ecclston may relent, especially since he has done the role in Thor 2, and reprise his role of the doctor perhaps as a pre Rose doctor.6 March 2014 at 19:37 #26185ConfusedPolarity @confusedpolarity
Blimey there’s a lot been going on here today!
@missshannonkent: I’d rather like to see Capaldi in the role for a good while before considering his successor – at the moment I can’t think of anyone I’d rather see as The Doctor than him.
@jimthefish; @phaseshift: I recall Adrian Hodges saying right after the announcement that if a second series of The Musketeers were to be commissioned they wouldn’t re-cast but would replace Richelieu with a new “villain of the year”. It’ll be a tough job – the Cardinal is for my money the most interesting character in the show, much more watchable for having clear motives than being an “off with his head!” type psychopath – but perhaps it’d be easier than just changing the face and pretending nobody notices! He may be integral to the novel, but given the liberties taken already I don’t suppose the producers are going to worry about upsetting any purists in the audience. Most of them have probably give up watching anyway 🙂
I’m not sure how these things work, but I can’t imagine a high-profile actor likely to be in demand elsewhere being firmly committed to take part in a second series that might or might not happen. Would a contract even be signed to get out of? It’d seem an awfully chancy business for all the cast if they were expected to turn down other potential work without a cast-iron guarantee of employment!
@devilishrobby; @tomsscarf: I’m with @bluesqueakpip on Eccleston; if he didn’t enjoy his time on the show it was best for him and everyone else that he should leave after one series. I really can’t see him coming back to Doctor Who anytime soon, either. He never claimed to be a fan, and I doubt he had any idea of the attention/fuss/hysteria (delete as applicable!) it would generate. I get the feeling that if he had, he wouldn’t have touched it with a barge pole!
Fair enough – we can’t all be fans, and if he’d sooner be remembered for other things than being the Ninth Doctor, so be it.
@phaseshift: re the tenth anniversary of the revival – If BBC Three had still been going they’d probably have updated the “Ultimate Guide” and thrown another embarrassingly awful “party”. Being thankful for small mercies we’re spared that, maybe a repeat of “Rose” on BBC Two? I can’t see them making too much of it within a couple of years of the big 50 (but if they’d like to do a special to tide us over between Christmas and the start of series 9 I wouldn’t be complaining!)6 March 2014 at 19:48 #26186
Actually I thought the first series was locked away exclusively in second rights showings on pay-TV (Watch, etc) so the likelihood of a repeat of that was slim.
I’ve been following the announcement on BBC3 myself. I’m hoping some of that £30m will be still go towards some quirky material of the type BBC3 used to show (Being Human, The Fades, In the Flesh) on other channels. After a brief bloom of interest in genre sparked largely by Doctor Who, new offerings seem remarkably thin on the ground.
To put a clear Doctor Who spin on the news though:
“Let’s see how YOU like it”, says Doctor Who Confidential Team. 😉6 March 2014 at 20:29 #26188
I think irrespective of whether Tom regretted it later, I’m sure you’ll agree it was his decision to make based on what he felt at the time. Same with Eccles. The amount of vitriol from certain over-emotional elements of fandom could be alarming even before the invention of t’internet*.
* (For The Five Doctors, see also: Poison Pen letters to Richard Hurndall for daring to take the role of the First Doctor when offered it)6 March 2014 at 20:47 #26189
I like the thought of seeing a bit more McGann if possible. I’m not sure if we have anybody who is more familiar with these issues, but I read a suggestion a while ago that to use the Eighth Doctor in the minisode, the BBC had to approach Big Finish, which has an exclusive contract to produce “broadcastable content” featuring the specified older Doctors. The suggestion is that the contract was drawn up in the Gap, is fairly watertight, and the reason that the Big Finish companions got the namecheck was a condition of Big Finish, for the BBC to use the Eighth Doctor in it.
It actually sounded crazy enough to be true.
(and he gasps in the cringe-worthiness of the thought) the two doctor story, and I apologise the name escapes me, with Colin Baker and Patrick Troughton.
Ah. The Two Doctors, it was called, predictably enough. 😉6 March 2014 at 20:55 #26190
If BBC Three had still been going they’d probably have updated the “Ultimate Guide” and thrown another embarrassingly awful “party”
Ohhhhhh. Gawd bless you, guv. A timely reminder that things could always be worse. 😀6 March 2014 at 21:14 #26191Anonymous @
Oh no not the Zoe Ball party show! After rewriting the Time War, any chance of John Hurt going back to stop that too? If he can do that, its next stop Dimensions in Time!!! Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeze6 March 2014 at 21:28 #26192
@phaseshift – Oh I know, I was just mentioning it.
However I didn’t know Hurndall received letters like that, that’s awful. I don’t understand people sometimes. No one could replace Hartnell as the First Doctor, but Hurndall did a good job of playing him in ‘The Five Doctors’. At least the First Doctor was represented in that episode, and also there was a clip of Hartnell at the beginning.6 March 2014 at 21:34 #26193Anonymous @
In the Five Doctors, Hurndall’s impersonation of Hartnell was a lot better than the guy playing the Third Doctor!6 March 2014 at 22:05 #26194
@tomsscarf the third doctor played the third doctor in the five doctors lol6 March 2014 at 22:51 #26195Anonymous @
I know, but Pertwee’s performance was like a bad impression!!!! Not his fault probably. Some of his dialogue was out of character.6 March 2014 at 23:21 #26196
@tomsscarf – The fact that all of the Doctors screen time was spaced out within a 90 minute episode was probably a contributing factor. There wasn’t really much time for character development, so all the Doctors just have their basic typical traits without anything more in-depth. If they had more screen time/dialogue then perhaps it would of given them a chance to bring in more characterization. Of course I say this without having watched the special extended edition of ‘The Five Doctors’, so can’t comment on that.6 March 2014 at 23:35 #26197Anonymous @
@phaseshift — that stuff about BF is v. interesting indeed. Not sure that the Beeb would have been willing to be handcuffed against using any old Docs should it take their fancy though. Especially as apparently one thing that held up getting a new series off the ground was trying to pool the various rights from 50 years of Who into one place. But I honestly don’t know so it could be the case. I’m pretty sure that if they asked nicely, BF would oblige anyway….
Also interesting about the Musketeers seeking new villains. Think that could work actually and am pretty sure they won’t really give a stuff about the purists. I guess it would be much like the way Morgana vanished from Merlin for a spell (arf!!) before showing up again at the end.
Have mixed feelings about BBC3 getting the chop. I thought it largely awful but did on occasion produce a few belters of programmes, the trouble being that they tended to cancel them to make room for something worse. I’m still nursing a long-term grudge against the cancellation of Pulling. But it deserves kudos for The Fades, In The Flesh, early Being Human and a few others. Not to mention repeats of Who. And Torchwood, I suppose.
But all the same, I’d rather see it go than BBC4, which to me seems to me the last bastion of Proper BBC.7 March 2014 at 00:22 #26198
That was an odd one about BF. It was a comment on one of their forums which was indulging in some gratuitous schadenfreude against the BBC, effectively congratulating Big Finish for getting one over on them in the contract (which was set up in the late 90s when Who was most definitively off-air with little hope of returning). The comment (and commentator) were soon deleted (which means nothing – it could have been factually wrong, in which case some of the language was defamatory).
Largely I’d agree with you about BBC3 and 4, but I suppose we both are theoretically more suited to the demographic of the 4. I’d like to see them get a bit of that drama money to do a few home-grown projects again. I know the Scandi-noir gets the Guardian excited, but I used to enjoy a lot of their one-shots and films. I’m thinking of Ian Rankin’s Reichenbach Falls, the John Wyndham parallel universe story Random Quest, The First Men in the Moon (Mark Gattis), The Quatermass Experiment restage, as well as the docu-dramas like Fantabulosa. They really spent their money well, when they had a drama budget.7 March 2014 at 00:41 #26199
It’s quite true about Hurndall. I was quite a young fan in the Appreciation Society (early teens) at the time and got a lot of the fanzines and newsletters. Man – they went crazy that year. Full of what you might charitably term “green crayon” letters. I gave up in the end.7 March 2014 at 02:43 #26200janetteB @janetteb
Tom Baker explains his reasons for not returning for the Five Doctors in his autobiography. (sorry don’t recall the title.) He was very attached to the role, which was evident, and went through a period of depression after leaving it. He did not feel up to returning at that time. For fans to react the way they did was worse than selfish but I think it mostly arose from the feeling that T.B. had betrayed them and turned his back on the show. Well yes he did but for perfectly understandable reasons. Christopher Ecclestone has almost opposite reasons. He did not enjoy the role, or at least not sufficiently to want to spend the remainder of his career revisiting it and was not and is not a fan. I suspect he is a cross between Jude Fowley, (Jude the Obscure) and the character he played in “Our Friends in the North”. I am happy to appreciate what he gave to the show and respect him for his honesty. I am glad that he turned down the part in the 50th because it led to a novel idea, the hidden regeneration. As often happens art is born out of a mistake or adverse situation.
Janette7 March 2014 at 06:29 #26202FaeGrl @faegrl
@devilishrobby – With all of the comments about how terribly manipulative the Second Doctor is, I do wonder if the gist is I shouldn’t like him or I should? I’m pretty sure that his Doctor has a dark side and trickster side, like every Doctor do. Even so, it hasn’t changed my impression that the Tenth is a good alien and very charming, lots of fun, in spite of his darkness with The Family, Timelord Victorious, and that moment on the tram when he shouted, “Because I’m clever!”. I suspect that my impression of the Second being very sweet, will not change either. I could be wrong, but I can’t say for sure yet… I haven’t watched one of his serials yet. 😉
@monochromedimension – Yes, my impression of the Second Doctor is that he has more of a sensitive soul, more so than the rest of the Doctor. Of course, they all care, but somehow I get the feeling that the Second Doctor have less… erm, “temper tantrums” than any of the others. That’s very interesting that Family Of Blood was originally written for the Seventh! I’m sorry that the show was canceled before McCoy got a chance to play it. It did seem to fit in well with Tennant’s Doctor, as he was slipping into a darker pattern, after the loss of Rose. A lot of fans were complaining about that, because before Rose disappeared he was very silly, upbeat, and never did anything untoward. However, I enjoyed that arch, because it made him seem almost human.7 March 2014 at 12:09 #26205Anonymous @
We’ve had most of the old villains back. How about a return for the Rani? Any thoughts? I’d go for Rosie Marcel from Holby City, she’d be fab!7 March 2014 at 12:19 #26206
@faegrl – Oh it wasn’t a planned episode (to my knowledge), it was a book. When the series was cancelled the Seventh Doctor remained the current Doctor through comics, books etc. until the movie came out, quite a few years later. I dunno, just certain aspects of those episodes seem more Seventh Doctor-esque to me… though again its a couple of episodes I haven’t watched in a long time. You know what would be interesting? A meeting between the Seventh and Tenth Doctors. (I think it’s implied that the Ninth has met the Seventh… but now I can’t find that information.)
Re: Second Doctor – Oh when the Second Doctor gets angry its actually just more cute… in my opinion. lol! And despite his manipulation to get things sorted out, he really is such a sweet Doctor. He doesn’t have that dark attitude the Seventh Doctor displays sometimes either (references: Seventh talking to Davros, Seventh talking to the Happiness Patrol snipers, Seventh’s method of defeating Fenric and although he ultimately could not go through with it… contemplating decapitating somebody in ‘Battlefield’). So with all that said, the Second Doctor, although manipulative too, is not a dark Doctor in my opinion. And I really think you’ll like him, most folks do!
@tomsscarf – Bringing the Rani back would be a good idea. I don’t know where she’s supposed to be at the moment though… Gallifrey perhaps? Also talking about Time Lord villains… what about the Monk? Who knows where he’s got to now.7 March 2014 at 14:41 #26207blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave
Having been off-line for quite a while, I have not had the chance to catch up on all the discussion over the past few weeks, so what I am about to say may have already been discussed upstream.
However, given the BBC announcement about Danny Pink, it raises the prospect that Coal Hill high school may prove to be a site of recurring importance in the coming season. And given that the 50th explicitly indicated that Ian Chesterton was still around and on the board of governors of the school, it does raise the tantalising prospect that William Russell might make an appearance at some point.
If so, I would jump for joy, gimpy foot notwithstanding.7 March 2014 at 16:58 #26208
@monochromedimension wasn’t the monk some kind of proto Master OK I have only ever watched clips from the story, but from what I could gather the Monk was very Masterish (now there is a coined word dont blast me grammerand spelling Dalek 🙂 )7 March 2014 at 17:06 #26209Anonymous @
Just a thought- wouldn’t Capaldi have made a fabulous Master?7 March 2014 at 18:46 #26212MysticalCowboy @mysticalcowboy
Hey guys, really off-topic here.
I was watching a show in the Netherlands called ‘Adam zkt Eva’. It’s not about the show, it’s about the host. I really thought she looked like Billie Piper or known as Rose from Doctor who. The host is named Nicolette Kluijver, give it some thought.
Here’s a picture:
Hope I did not ruin the conversation you guys had.7 March 2014 at 21:18 #26216
@tomsscarf – Yes he would’ve made a good Master actually. I do wonder who the next Master will be, lots of rumors going around at the moment that he will regenerate. I don’t think the current Master is suited to go up against Capaldi’s Doctor… he was more suited for the Tenth. I wish Jacobi had been the Master for longer.
@mysticalcowboy – Don’t worry, Topic Dalek acknowledges you were talking about Doctor Who in your post. And actually… yes she does look a lot like Rose!7 March 2014 at 21:19 #26217
@devilishrobby – Ah don’t worry, I’m the Topic Dalek… not the Grammar Dalek. And no the Monk was not the Master, I think that some form of merchandise once said they were the same character… but no, they are different.7 March 2014 at 21:26 #26219
@blenkinsopthebrave – Oh I do hope Ian makes an appearance in season 8! He’s one of my favourite companions.7 March 2014 at 22:09 #26220Juniperfish @juniperfish
@tomsscarf Capaldi would indeed have made a great Master – perhaps we will get a body swap story to allow him to Master-it-up for an episode or two 🙂
@scaryb Oopsy – the glitter is still getting all over things on the sofa I see <tee hee>7 March 2014 at 22:45 #26223Anonymous @
@monochromedimension – I agree, Derek Jacobi should’ve had a longer run as The Master.
Of course, there’s nothing to stop The Doctor running into a pre-chameleon arched version of him. Wishful thinking I know but as they say “be careful what you wish for” 🙂7 March 2014 at 22:47 #26224Anonymous @7 March 2014 at 23:11 #26225blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave
Yes, it would be brilliant to see Ian Chesterton once more. In fact, I have decided that the following is my first bonkers theory for 2014:
That it was not just a nostalgic sop that meant that Ian’s name was on the sign outside Coal Hill high school in the 50th. Nor a bit of nostalgia that Clara is teaching there. Rather, it was done by Moffat in order to set the scene for the (re)appearance of Ian. Think about it. It would be a fabulous way of tying the show back to its origins, like a Mobius strip.
Whether Ian would have a scene with Clara and Danny (recognising himself and Barbara in them both) or whether he might actually meet the Doctor (and Capaldi is old enough for the meeting to work with the elderly Ian) I don’t know, but the potential to use William Russell while he is happily still with us and still acting (as witnessed by his lovely cameo in AAISAT) is just too good to pass up.
So, bonkers theory or wish fulfillment? Perhaps both.7 March 2014 at 23:29 #26226
@fatmaninabox – Oh that would be interesting, highly unlikely… but its a possibility. I do want more screen time of Jacobi’s Master… of when he is actually the Master.
@blenkinsopthebrave – That’s a great idea, I just really want Ian back in Doctor Who… even if its just for one episode. It would be amazing if he could meet the Doctor again.8 March 2014 at 02:30 #26228janetteB @janetteb
@blenkinsopthebrave and @monochromedimension (I hope I got that right) I’ll third that. When it transpired that Clara was teaching at Coal Hill I hoped then that we would finally get to meet Ian. I am certain that Moffat has plans to develop the Coal Hill School connection further especially now we know that a second teacher will be a recurring character. Meeting Ian again tops my wish list for this season.
Ian and Barbara were amongst my favourite assistants. The dynamic between them and the Doctor is well captured in the very amusing “The Romans” for anyone who is not familiar with earlier stories. And while on that subject, I consider “The Time Meddler ” to be an excelent choice for a re-watch.
Janette8 March 2014 at 05:32 #26231ScaryB @scaryb
@blenkinsopthebrave @janetteb @monochromedimension
An Ian cameo would certainly get my vote also.
But I’m also wondering where they’re going with the Coal Hill school refs. Is it a callback to Unearthly Child days? Could we perhaps see a return to adult male and female companions plus a grandchild/grandchild substitute?? And the Doctor’s been back here before in Remembrance of the Daleks (retreiving a long lost artefact)
That’s interesting re the actors’ contracts for Big Finish. If that’s the case, presumably, when they were being drawn up in the 90s, there was no foreseeable possibility of the BBC bringing the show back as a TV series, so it would make sense to make sure no-one else could use original Doctors for non-BF work.8 March 2014 at 05:40 #26232ScaryB @scaryb
YAY!! Furry hugs my finny friend 🙂
Capaldi/Master body swap – great idea. Very BG Who too
And sad to see BBC3 going also. Can only hope the money they save actually does go towards creating adventurous new drama, and bringing on new young writers.
You do look rather fetching with that occasional “ping” of light-reflecting glitter in your dark corners tho 😈
<hastily brushes down the sofa… slips in puddle… dang fishes are back!!>
😀8 March 2014 at 06:50 #26234
Hmmm @scaryb now you’ve got me thinking wild speculation what if the new reoccurring teacher is Ian Chestertons son or grandson it’s almost the sort of ironic homage they might do. It would also provide an almost perfect way to have the Ian make cameo appearances a bit like Bernard Cribbins grandfather to Donna Noble so to speak given that Ian would have to be in his 70’s or 80’s at this point.8 March 2014 at 08:32 #26235
@janetteb – Ian and Barbara are two of the most important companions the Doctor has ever had… they’re also absolutely brilliant. Let’s hope I an returns.
@scaryb – Yep the Seventh Doctor retrieved the artefect (no spoilers, as @faegrl will be watching it soon) that the First Doctor left behind, I always wonder why the First had it anyhow. And indeed the two new companions seem to at least be referencing In and Barbara.8 March 2014 at 08:55 #26236
Sorry for the typos in my previous post, I’m on my tablet and for some reason it doesn’t like spelling ‘Ian’. Grammar and Spelling Dalek, you can’t blame Topic Dalek for its auto correcting control panel!
The topic ‘On The Sofa (4)’ is closed to new replies.