[genek1953 @replies]

There are many missing and reconstructed parts of Tenth Planet that provide opportunities to insert new scenes, or even to insert Capaldi into previously existing scenes as long as his voice isn’t in the audio.

[genek1953 @replies]

There is a brief whiteout during the B&W Hartnell/Troughton transition footage that could be seen as “regeneration glow.”

The trailer shot of Polly looks like the first Doctor to me, as he’s dressed the same in both that shot and the next when he exits his TARDIS. But there’s precedent for companions having their memories wiped, and while the regeneration of the first Doctor to the second is most likely a fixed point in time, that doesn’t preclude some of the minor events surrounding it being rewritten.

 

[genek1953 @replies]

If Bradley’s Doctor is also regenerating, reasonable to presume we may be getting a glimpse of the second Doctor. If so will it be an as yet unidentified new performer or cgi’d footage of  Patrick Troughton…?

[genek1953 @replies]

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

[genek1953 @replies]

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.

[genek1953 @replies]

If the Doctor is representative of Time Lords in general, they retain their memories but their personalities can change. So it’s quite plausible to imagine that after a regeneration or two relationships with friends and family may not endure. The Doctor himself has said that he can’t look back on his.

[genek1953 @replies]

@antaus: A woman is not “at the helm” of Doctor Who. The person at the helm is the showrunner. The actor portraying the Doctor is the figurehead at the bow of the ship, and goes where the showrunner steers the ship.

Doctor Who began with a woman at the helm, way back in 1963. And Verity Lambert did quite a good job of steering the ship.

[genek1953 @replies]

The pressure on new Doctors is always enormous. But all things considered, if the sixth Doctor’s personality didn’t make me stop watching back in 1984, there’s probably nothing they can do with the 13th that will.

As for companion interaction, I so want to see an encounter between the 13th Doctor and Jack Harkness. Even if it’s only in a minisode.

[genek1953 @replies]

Doctor Who’s ratings have been declining for some time now. Whether that’s due to negative reactions to recent Doctors or is just an indication that the show is running out of steam, who knows. Either way, the predominantly male viewership are drifting away. So perhaps what is really going on is merely an attempt to attract a new part of the potential viewer base that has not paid much mind to the show up til now.

[genek1953 @replies]

@mirime: Why can’t boys want to be a female character, admire and identify with a woman?

In order for that to happen, there first have to be such characters presented, and there has been a dearth of them.

[genek1953 @replies]

Chibnall has said that the BBC hired him to be “risky” and “bold,” so there’s no need for his motivation to be anything other than to do something that would stir the pot. And it has certainly been well-stirred.

[genek1953 @replies]

I do not ignore someone’s gender or preference. They are simply irrelevant to how we interact with each other…unless we both agree it would be more fun if we made them relevant.

[genek1953 @replies]

JW’s clothing in the intro trailer is not how the 13th Doctor will be dressed.

https://www.bleedingcool.com/2017/07/16/interview-doctor-whos-13th-doctor/

[genek1953 @replies]

I don’t recall hearing “Time Lady” used in the modern Doctor Who. “Lord” and “Lady” do not have the same formal significance internationally as they do in The Commonwealth, so it will not be a surprise if “Time Lord” is now a genderless term.

As for “good reason,” it is what the showrunner wants, and that is really all that matters. Because the last time a Doctor Who showrunner was overruled, this was the result:

 

[genek1953 @replies]

@nick: WRT how a 1000+ year old alien “should” be…

One rather large difference I’ve noted between classic and modern Who is that in the classics, the newly regenerated Doctors usually made an “I am still me” sort of assertion and attempted to just push on, only to develop different attitudes and behaviors as the new Doctor’s persona developed. In modern Who, the exiting Doctor experiences angst and expresses the feeling that the impending regeneration is “death,” and the new Doctor bursts forth with a radically different persona that over time drifts back toward “I’m incredibly old and nearing the end of my days.”

So it comes as no great surprise to me if a newly regenerated Doctor does something that I couldn’t imagine an old Doctor ever doing. Nor will it come as a surprise if the next Doctor takes on an increasingly older persona as she approaches her own eventual ending.

[genek1953 @replies]

I am much more interested in what Chibnall’s plans are, because much of Whittaker’s success or failure as the Doctor depends on what stories Chibnall puts her in and the things he has her doing and saying.

I would like DW to be less serial and more episodic. I am especially not fond of two and three parters.

If the Master/Missy stays dead, that will suit me fine.

And I am so done with having the Doctor’s companions becoming romantic with the Doctor. People do not have to fall in love just because they’re flatmates in a blue box.

[genek1953 @replies]

@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.

[genek1953 @replies]

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.

[genek1953 @replies]

There’s never been a trend in Doctor ages. Tom Baker was 47 the year he regenerated into 29-year old Peter Davison, and at age 32 Davison became 40-year old Colin Baker. The random nature of regeneration is “baked into” the history of Who.

And, of course, none of them look anywhere near as old as the Doctor’s “actual” age.

I believe the longest running gag in Doctor Who is the Doctor’s initial reaction to the new regeneration’s teeth and ears.

[genek1953 @replies]

They started dropping hints about Time Lords changing gender during regeneration back in Series 6 (“The Doctor’s Wife”). Ever since then it has mostly been a question of “when?” and should not especially surprising.

I was, however, expecting the 13th to be somewhat older…

[Author]

Posts