Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
7 July 2017 at 19:50 #60465
@brewski — I’m hopeful that you’ll get at least some of your christmas wishes as I think you’re definitely onto something with your theories about the spesh….
7 July 2017 at 15:27 #60454@brewski — I’ll be very curious to see just what approach we’ll see. Can’t imagine we’ll see all the Doctors though, maybe just edited highlights and I imagine some of them will just be re-edited footage a la The Name of the Doctor. If indeed this is the approach taken. It might just be some kind of Two Doctors. Rachel Talalay has used the expression ‘fangasm’ though…..
5 July 2017 at 18:06 #60406What @blenkinsopthebrave said…
5 July 2017 at 16:55 #60403@nick and @bluesqueakpip–
They tend not to do categorical denials as it doesn’t really look good to be remembered as utter liars further down the line. If it had been true I’d imagine they’d have just kept their heads down until … whenever.
Possibly Pip’s idea that she was offered the role and turned it down has a bit of credence. Who knows, maybe she’s going to have a guest role at some point but I think she’s just too busy — I suspect if her role in Han Solo ends up being a recurring one, that would be one she’d be unwilling to screw up. And as well as Fleabag, doesn’t she also have some spy movie in the works too? And it’s not just the year’s filming, there’s also all the publicity duties too. For some reason, I just can’t see her on the convention circuit, although I guess with Solo she’s going to be facing that anyway.
And is it too cynical to suggest that Ian Katz has learned that having a cheeky bit of Who speculation on his ailing show helps boost its profile no end?
5 July 2017 at 15:31 #60397@Nick–
It looks like her agent has now issued a categorical denial (suggestive of a story behind that in itself, although maybe she’s sick of being inundated by calls and tweets in the past 24 hours) so it looks like we can put that one to bed. A pity. She would have been good.
But I’m afraid I think we’re now deep in ‘who’s the next Doc’ silly season, which is always deeply tiresome. It makes me wish they would just go ahead and announce it and save us the usual ‘it’s Ben Wishaw/it’s Tilda Swinton/it’s Olivia Colman/it’s Miranda Hart’ nonsense….
5 July 2017 at 13:43 #60395I’m not sure this even counts as spoiler and is rather mere speculation, but Stuart Heritage on The Graun discussing the possibility of Phoebe Waller-Bridge. Much as it pains me to say it, I think he’s probably spot on.
5 July 2017 at 00:12 #60380@wolfweed — PWB would be an excellent choice I think but I somehow can’t see it. What with Fleabag S2 and the Han Solo movie (although filming for that will be done soon, I guess). But that was a rather lukewarm denial it has to be said.
But she’d definitely be one of my personal top choices.
4 July 2017 at 16:32 #60359OK, this is still slightly puzzling me — if the Doctor does indeed regenerate at Christmas, what exactly triggered it in the first place? There’s no suggestion now that the shooting in The Lie of the Land was anything other than false. Was it then the beating by the Masters that triggered it because there was that little inkling of it in the woods. Or was it being blasted point blank by the Cyberman in the woods?
4 July 2017 at 16:29 #60358@wolfweed–
Thanks for that. Thought it was a bit unlikely and would have been a big blow to Cardiff. And I’d lay odds the Beeb got some kind of funding incentive for setting up there in the first place.
Mind you, if it had been true, it would have been rather a drastic measure to appease Alan Cumming….
4 July 2017 at 14:33 #60354@wolfweed — there is quite a stonking difference in size between them, isn’t there. As the 10th Doctor might say, ‘compensating for something’?
4 July 2017 at 10:51 #60343@tardigrade–
I think it’s the fact that the Doctor has been through a set of full regenerations that means we won’t see the Valeyard. Capaldi’s Doc strictly speaking is Doctor 1.1 rather than Doctor 13 (why does the War Doctor not still count as a proper Doctor? Surely he was redeemed and earns the right to be the Doctor again?)
I actually think it’s hard to imagine how a Valeyard set of episodes would work. Here’s the Doctor being evil again! The problem, as with the initial regeneration limit, is that Robert Holmes introduced these concepts thinking that no one would ever have to confront them and that the series would be long gone by then. I suspect Missy was Moffat’s way of dealing with that plotline and showing a regeneration that goes against type, an anti-Valeyard, if you like.
4 July 2017 at 01:32 #60334@nick — Kroton featured in a few secondary strips in Doctor Who Weekly, mostly helping humans as he struggled with his revived humanity and he also ended up being a companion to the Eighth Doctor in his comic adventures for a while later too. They’re definitely worth seeking out. Quite a tragic character though.
4 July 2017 at 01:24 #60331@wolfweed–
and a fine example of the distinctive art style of the late, lamented Steve Dillon. Still at the height of his Veronica Lake fixation too. Did he ever draw a woman who didn’t have her hair falling over her eyes?
4 July 2017 at 00:57 #60327To me that opens the possibility that any cyberman could be freed
Yes, that definitely seems to be the case. There’s definitely other cases where Cyber-programming is defied. Toberman and Lytton from the BG series both spring to mind. And then there’s Kroton, who I think the Cyber-Bill plot was definitely channelling on some level–
I don’t know if he’s actually canon but I think he definitely should be….
4 July 2017 at 00:18 #60324@mudlark — you’re quite right, that makes sense. I suppose the reason why things like neural nets were not mentioned in the Tenth Planet was because Kit Pedler and Gerry Davis just could not have predicted that they would become a thing.
But, just for yucks, here’s the first meeting with the Cybermen back in ’66
3 July 2017 at 23:19 #60320@mudlark–
Bill said that she could feel the programming, and I got the impression that she was having to fight to retain her sense of identity. I suspect that, in time, with nothing much left to sustain her sense of identity but her brain and a rudimentary nervous system, she might have succumbed.
Yes, I think you’re probably right. Although I think they fact that we’re talking about pretty much the first iteration of Cyber technology here. Perhaps it’s the primitive nature of the conversion that allows her to assert herself in a way that conversion into, say, a Cybus version would not.
But now I come to think of it, the idea of their being a level of ‘programming’ within the Cyberman is not something that I think necessarily applied to the Mondasian version. From what I remember, the Mondasian Cybermen had a relative amount of free will — they’d just been augmented and had their emotions removed. They even still had names. And there was not much suggestion of a central overriding Cyber-controller or Cyberiad or whatever. They operated out of dogma, rather than programming and planned to ‘save’ the humans not out of programming but because they personally believed it to be the correct course of action. That was always my take on it anyway.
3 July 2017 at 23:05 #60316@wolfweed –nice finds. I was just thinking that this thread hasn’t seen much love of late.
I also quite like this one….
seems right #DoctorWho pic.twitter.com/X00KYOZOb7
— valentina (@marshcaps) July 2, 2017
3 July 2017 at 21:32 #60309I notice a few enterprising souls have put up videos filmed of their screens and put them on YouTube but the quality really isn’t very good.
However, if you’re using Chrome, I’d recommend installing the ZenMate extension and changing the settings to the US and that should get round it….
3 July 2017 at 20:22 #60298@wolfweed–
Yes, I think you’re right. I wonder what PC would think if he knew that people were giving his digits such forensic examination….
But the more I think of it, the more I wish they had done this.
3 July 2017 at 20:02 #60296@wolfweed–
Yes, that hand thing is quite odd as I thought it’s almost certainly Capaldi’s hand. It’s just that he’s got arty, girly fingers that’s all. Could be wrong though. I was the buffoon who dismissed all the Heather chat last week.
Still it wold have been a nice tricksy touch if they had done that….
3 July 2017 at 14:47 #60273@nick–
The Cyber-Bill scenes add to the Doctor’s moral quandary with the Cybermen doesn’t it ?
It totally does. And unlike Daleks, or just about any other ‘villains’ who are making a conscious choice to be ‘evil’, justifying the killing of Cybermen is a lot more dubious. They have no free choice. They are ordinary people who have had something done to them. They are victims. Do they then deserve to die for that? It seems to me that this comes across far more with the Mondasian version than it does with any subsequent ones, where the moral question at the heart of their existence can be elided by their robotic appearance.
3 July 2017 at 14:10 #60267@wolfweed — you little tease you. But again as revelations go, it’s one I’d be more surprised with if it wasn’t happening. I raised more of an eyebrow at the idea of moving production of Who to Manchester. Though it seems logical if the Experience is calling it a day. Quite a blow to Cardiff though if it’s true. And what about that purpose-build console room? Presumably it’s relatively dismantable? I can’t see CC getting a new one just yet.
The main thing I’m wondering now though is if they’re actually going to manage to keep the new Doc’s identity a secret until Christmas.
3 July 2017 at 13:41 #60264Well, on reflection, that was just great. First of all, apologies for doubting anyone who thought Heather was going to make a return. You were totally right and I’m now happily convinced that that was indeed Heather that we saw in the window in the last episode.
Last week I was worrying about whether this was going to be too action-oriented but while it had its set pieces, which I suspect are a pre-requisite for finale, they by no means overshadowed the emotional beats. I did feel that a couple of the elements did get kind of lost — the menace represented by the two Masters, for instance, but I guess the point is that they were there to resolve the psychological issue of Missy’s redemption, not necessarily as antagonists.
On that note, as @bluesqueakpip noted, it’s interesting that the temptation was resisted to give Simm and/or Gomez a regeneration. I think it’s right that it’s because SM has gone out of his way not to close any doors for CC. As to what Master we’ll see in future, I have no idea. I think Simm was great here, really doing a good job of playing a Master that he seemed a lot more comfortable with, and was really rather old school in many ways. I’d certainly have no problem with seeing him again. Same goes for Gomez too, of course and it strikes me that there’s more potential in her quixotic, unfathomable version rather than a mere moustache-twirler. But would she work with a Doctor other than Capaldi? I suspect not. And this does seem to be a fitting end for the Master’s story. It would be a shame to see that work undone and a return to a post-Missy back-to-evil Master. (Although perhaps a Master trying to be evil and suffering constant pangs of conscience, of the influence of her past incarnation might be interesting.)
The other thing that didn’t quite work for me was the return of the Cybus Cybermen. I know I’m biased, but design-wise they really didn’t compare well to the Mondasian versions and I hope that they get at least another redesign in the future that takes on board the more organic body horror elements that the Mondasian version convey so well. I suspect the more modern ones were used because they more robot-like and it’s perhaps less disturbing to see them getting blown sky-high as opposed to something a bit more recognisably human. And I quite liked that there seemed to be an actual point for using the Mondasians. I’m not sure those art-deco metal masks would have conveyed the same buried emotion that that cloth face and blank eyes seemed to for Cyber-Bill.
As to the idea that Capaldi might somehow regenerate into himself at Christmas, while nothing would give me more pleasure than to see him stay — he just doesn’t seem ‘done’ to me. I felt that both Tennant and Smith’s Doctors had run their course but I could happily stand another year of Capaldi at least. But I just don’t see it. First of all, he’s had his epic regeneration-inducing battle, which was great (and had real shades of the end of Logan I thought). It would be a shame if that struggle could cheated somehow. Secondly, I think @bluesqueakpip is bang on in her analysis of where the Christmas story is going, of convincing (both) Doctors of the need to regenerate when the times comes. (A kind of It’s a Wonderful Life in reverse. With the central character being convinced of the necessity of accepting his ‘death’.) I also don’t think the First Doctor is the only one we’re going to see — and I don’t mean the 13th either.
Someone up-thread said they didn’t like the Tennant/Capaldi reluctance to regenerate and that it makes the transition too traumatic. I’ve got a lot of sympathy for that and do understand what they mean but I do think it’s actually necessary. Regeneration seems to me too much like a ‘get out of jail free’ card otherwise. It’s no doubt the dour Scotsman coming out in me but it seems to me that there has to be some kind of a price. Back in the heady fanfic days, I was going to have regeneration work by having ‘prints’ of compatible individuals harvested by the Time Lords and kept on a database to be accessed when a regeneration was required, at which point the original would blink out of existence. My plan was then to be for Susan and the Doctor to rebel against the callousness and for regeneration to be essentially the last thing either of them would want to do morally. That’s maybe a little extreme, but I do like the idea that it’s something to be ambivalent about — and I do like the idea of the Doctor railing against constantly having to redefine himself, question just who and what he is.
On @blenkinsopthebrave‘s idea that CC is being gifted a version of Who where there are no more call-backs to the past, I’m not so sure. It can certainly be overdone sometimes, but I think it’s become a necessary part of the show’s dynamic to have at least one or two familiar elements each year. (And isn’t it a stipulation of the Terry Nation estate that the Daleks have to appear at least once every year?) But I think we definitely should see more ‘new’ things. And I’d be very surprised if CC isn’t champing at the bit to create his own Weeping Angels. I certainly got the impression that RTD really wanted to create his own classic monster, with the Ood being the prime candidate, but they never really took.
Phew. That was lengthy. Apologies for that. Short version is I loved it.
2 July 2017 at 19:13 #60217@wolfweed–
LOL. He even looks like a Daily Express reader….
2 July 2017 at 19:01 #60215@wolfweed — it is fascinating the way the Express feels the need to repost the exact same ‘oh my god, the next Doctor is going to be a lentil-eating female lefty’ article every second day or so….
I guess it gets the hits…
2 July 2017 at 17:53 #60211@wolfweed–
dearie me. Though it is worth reading for the comments below, which are barking, even by Express standards….
2 July 2017 at 01:13 #60168@wolfweed–
That’s a terrfiic picture. I do hope that the tone of the xmas spesh does allow for some crotchety banter. 12 and 1 are the ideal double-act in many ways. It’s a shame that 1 never really got to do that much proper interaction with his other selves, what with Hartnell being too ill and Hurndall being too rubbish. And I’ve always wanted to see Capaldi interacting with other Docs — he just seems a good Doc for that kind of thing. I still hope one day that we’ll see him meet Smith too.
1 July 2017 at 22:16 #60156@wolfweed — good call. Seems to me that this episode had more than a few comic-related references. Cyber-Bill kept reminding me of Kroton and the reference to Planet 14 is an extremely geeky reference indeed….
1 July 2017 at 22:13 #60155@wolfweed–
aaaaaargh. My eyes!!!
On the other hand….
1 July 2017 at 21:21 #60150@wolfweed — that’s an amazing find. And illustrates why Who was in B&W in the 60s — the fashions were too awful to be seen in colour….
1 July 2017 at 21:06 #60139Well I seem to have something in my eye. Sniff.
That was great. There was maybe some stuff that didn’t quite work, maybe just a few too many things left hanging but the good more than outweighed the misjudged. Capaldi has never been better than he was tonight. I really, really don’t want him to go and I really like the idea of a Doctor refusing to go gentle into that good night.
But I think I’m going to need another rewatch before cogent thought forms itself.
(but @wolfweed @bluesqueakpip — I think Missy definitely did plan ahead and the ring idea is not unlikely. It would have been fun to see Simm regenerate into Gomez, but maybe there’s also another trick awaiting its reveal there too.)
1 July 2017 at 16:09 #60102@pedant–
which is what made it so devastating
But that’s just it. I personally didn’t find it devastating, not in the way that WEAT effortlessly achieved. And I really, really should have. All the elements are in place that it should reduce any fan to a Heather-esque puddle on the floor but for some reason it just didn’t for me. Don’t get me wrong, I like it, and I’m not saying it’s a bad episode. In fact it almost touches greatness but I don’t think it quite achieves storytelling masterclass status because there’s just something ever so slightly off about it.
The reason for that is, I think, that it elides just a couple of crucial moments. The first is Clara’s death which should have been much more of a kick in the teeth than it was (and Bill’s was, regardless of what happens tonight). I think it might have helped to have had seen Clara acting in a dangerously reckless way before we got to Face the Raven. We got suggestions of it but I think there should have been an explicit one, perhaps one where she came dangerously close to screwing it all up but failing to learn from her mistakes.
The other slight issue I think is that the return to Gallifrey and the Doctor essentially as Liam Neeson in Taken was just a little too rushed. Just a few more scenes of development would have done it. You could, for example, have taken Ohila out of it altogether and it wouldn’t have suffered. She was essentially there for a bit of fan service. But I realise that these might just be quibbles. For me, on reflection, Hell Bent just falls ever so slightly short of its ambitions because Face the Raven didn’t quite successfully lay enough groundwork for it to pay off.
But I agree that we’re probably midway though a three-parter that is looking much more promising. WEAT certainly set things up with more impact than FtR. Depending on how things go tonight, will depend on just how successful the Xmas spesh will be, I guess.
1 July 2017 at 14:42 #60095Having just rewatched the second half of s9, I think I have to concur with @bluesqueakpip. Clara’s ‘death’ didn’t really work (and it was for something that I sometimes accuse CC of — of being so enamoured of the ‘big moment’ at the end of the episode, regardless of narrative logic or character development, so it just goes to show that SM isn’t immune either.) FtR hits a bum note because Clara’s death never convinces, never feels inevitable. We constantly have the feeling that we’re being manipulated.
And this is really the reason why Hell Bent ultimately doesn’t work. Despite having one of the best set-up in Who history with Heaven Sent, the finale doesn’t really deliver. There’s so much here that should leave the viewer feeling shell-shocked — the return of Gallifrey, the Doctor facing down Rassilon, the Doctor pretty much breaking all of his codes to save his companion (and ultimately repeating the same behaviour that led to him leaving Gallifrey in the first place). But none of it really, truly convinces, possibly because we’re still feeling that we’re being deliberately prodded in certain directions. And I’m not sure it can be explained away by the complexity of emotions of characters under pressure. That argument could apply to just about any piece of drama. It doesn’t work because the drama is slightly wanting, that it demands emotional pay-offs into which it hasn’t put the necessary groundwork.
And it’s a shame because Heaven Sent really is a beautiful script in many ways. There’s lots of great lines and it should by rights be one of the major episodes of AG Who.
1 July 2017 at 12:45 #60084As an addendum, I posted this back before the current series started and suggested that it was something that we should always keep in mind when interacting on the forum. It seems appropriate to repost it now. It’s from Peter Capaldi reacting to the bullying of a Who fan.
“The essence of Doctor Who is kindness,” said Capaldi, “that is what really is underneath all of this.
“This is a person who moves through time and space and history, and all kinds of situations, and reacts to them, ultimately – despite the way the different versions of him may appear – he reacts with kindness.
“And that is how everyone involved with Doctor Who should be and how everyone who is a fan of it should be.
“If they’re not kind, they’re not receiving the show in the proper way and they’re not really a fan of it.”
1 July 2017 at 12:17 #60082@thane15–
Like @craig, I’m afraid I don’t recognise that analysis of the site at all. First of all, I can’t recall anyone ever being chucked off the site at all, (barring spammers). I can’t even recall the threat of such action ever being issued. In fact, I think we’ve done very well in almost never having to get too heavy with anyone while still managing to maintain a civil and respectful tone to all members, old and new.
Also slightly bemused by the ‘double standards’ line. Argument and debate are the lifeblood of this site — so long as it’s backed up by argument. That’s always been the case. It only takes the most cursory look through any of the threads to see a healthy diversion of opinion and it’s thankfully almost entirely thoughtful and respectful.
And when you get down to it, all that’s being asked for, that disagreement and debate and argument are fine but that politeness and basic civility are maintained, that everyone’s views are respected and that they feel they have a space here in which to express themselves. And I genuinely can’t see that being ‘oh so incredibly nice’ is not something that we shouldn’t aspire to.
Frankly, I too find it hard not to take some of the above personally. But if you have issues with the tone and content of the site then please do PM either @craig or myself and we’ll always do our best to address it.
30 June 2017 at 21:36 #60058@nick–
I agree. With the best will in the world to Marshall et al, I think someone too old school Doctor-ey will ultimately hurt the show at this point. It’s gone past that. Largely, because with Gaiman and SM having spent so much time laying the groundwork for significant change, it would just look like cowardice or lack of conviction if they settled for a Tennant/Smith clone now.
30 June 2017 at 21:32 #60057to echo @craig and @blenkinsopthebrave on this little corner of the internet. But I too definitely miss some of the old names. Maybe one day they shall come back. Yes, they shall come back….
@pedant and @nick–
I’m sure CC will be given a free hand in forming his vision for the show (although with qualifications. I don’t think anyone of the Who showrunners have had an entirely free hand. iDaleks anyone?) But I’m sure we’ve all had jobs where no instructions/orders have been issued but we’re still pretty clear what the boss is expecting of us.
@pedant has pretty accurately identified one of my key reservations about CC — narrative craft and logic is sometimes ignored in favour of either a particular extra-narrative point or it is sacrificed for the sake of some big ‘moment’ that may or may not make sense in the wider story. My other reservation is that he might not be temperamentally suited to running Who, given the tantrum he threw around Broadchurch Series 2. On the other hand, maybe that kind of bloody-mindedness is just what’s needed to keep the moaners in check.
Also agree with @pedant that a more vanilla choice of Doc may make CC want to be more radical in other ways. And starting off a new era in a slightly defensive position might not be the best idea. It’s also not good for a new Doctor either. Say it is Kris Marshall, is he going to be looked at as ‘the one they got when they bottled out of something more adventurous’.
30 June 2017 at 18:33 #60038@missrori — well, I hope that didn’t come across preachy or lecturey. Not the intention.
And yes, it’s certainly going to be interesting to see where the show goes now. It’s always fascinating when Who acquires a new voice and direction.
30 June 2017 at 18:18 #60036@pedant– Chibnall is totally a safe pair of hands. He was one of the key writers of the RTD era, which I suspect is one the Beeb would like to get back to in spirit at least. He was also exec producer of Torchwood and has experience of exec duties on Law and Order and Broadchurch. There were probably more creatively interesting choices but who did not have the perceived managerial chops — particularly as SM definitely had a phase of going through exec producers and having a reputation of being managerially ‘difficult’.
@missrori — I’m ashamed to say that I’m old enough to remember the casting of C Baker and there was a definite tone of cockiness, if not outright arrogance, emanating from the publicity office at that time and I vividly remember the announcement and interviews with both JNT and Baker at the time in Doctor Who Monthly (before it became Magazine) and the vibe as I recall wasn’t of risk but overweening confidence. Baker didn’t even really have to audition for the job. I think Davison was definitely considered a risk, and one that was considered to not particularly paid off and that Baker was a ‘back to basics’ Doc, despite the homicidal instability of this character. The advent of Baker, I think, marked the beginning of JNT’s most hubristic era and which eventually ended up with the show being cancelled.
@nick and @blenkinsopthebrave — I agree that we shouldn’t damn CC before he even starts — and it certainly wasn’t my intention to do so. And I also agree that a lighter, more fun, tone could just be what the show needs after the sombre Capaldi years. I’m just maintaining a slight scepticism, that’s all. But I’m more than looking forward to eating my stylish raspberry beret in a year’s time. And I’m looking forward to seeing what he does.
However, he’s not known for subtle, but maybe subtle is not what is required now. And I fear there might be a tendency to overcompensate for the perceived darkness of the last three years. We could be in for CC’s Graham Williams years to SM’s Hinchcliffe ones.
30 June 2017 at 15:30 #60028@wolfweed — Yes, I thought the five years, no questions asked, was bit too good to be true. And I wouldn’t be surprised if CC had been given a series of targets and conditions he has to meet. And one of those might have been a vanilla Doc, so, yeah, @missrori could end up being quite correct. She’s definitely correct that the Beeb is particularly jittery at the moment.
The only trouble with that is an attempt to wind back to an RTD-lite iteration of the show won’t work. No more than if the BG beeb had said ‘make it just like the Hinchcliffe/Holmes era’. If the show had just gone for a Hartnell MkII in 1966 then it wouldn’t be here now. Troughton was an inspired risk. So was Pertwee. So was Baker. The first big casting disaster was Colin Baker and I don’t think anyone at the time expected him to be. They thought ‘Tom Baker was big and this guy’s just like Tom Baker. Stick a whacky costume on him and off we go.’ They forgot the show had thrived by doing the unexpected, by moving in an unexpected direction but one which was still plugged in to the spirit of the times.
I’m probably being a doom-meister here but sticking a floppy-fringed white dude in the TARDIS and getting Chibbers to produce something that resembles Who By Committee is the quickest way to ensure that it doesn’t make it through the next five years.
30 June 2017 at 15:13 #60026@craig–
That’s lovely. So nice to see Twitter not used for evil for once….
30 June 2017 at 09:23 #60018It’s interesting that so close to a regeneration (apparently) that the book is still wide open on who it will be. SM might actually be pulling what was generally thought to be impossible in the internet age and give us a surprise Doctor.
As to the rumours, first of all I don’t think seeing a Doctor and then pulling it back is a good idea at all. Going by my ‘imprinting’ theories on the Capaldi blog that just screams out ‘this guy is not particularly welcome’. Every Doctor deserves his big entrance and this would essentially knacker that for whoever it is.
If it’d been me and we’re having a multi-Doctor story at Christmas, as it now seems we are, then it would maybe have been better if the future Doc had also made an appearance, fully formed, as it were. I do like the idea that Capaldi has been holding back his regeneration for some time but the question that presents itself is ‘why’?
And I really hope it’s not Kris Marshall. Nothing against the guy and I’m sure he’s more than capable. It’s just such a vanilla, decided-by-committee choice — at a point where the show really has to be a bit daring.
29 June 2017 at 21:43 #59986@wolfweed and @blenkinsopthebrave–
You’re both absolutely right. I always assume that Hartnell’s TARDIS was a lot chunkier than later versions but that’s clearly not the case. Must be getting mixed up with the Cushing version (which the Smith/Capaldi version seems to bear more than a passing to).
29 June 2017 at 21:08 #59983@wolfweed — that doesn’t look much like a Hartnell TARDIS to me….
Just sayin’….
29 June 2017 at 19:14 #59964@nick — I think Moffat’s already gone on record as saying that he’s been writing the Xmas spesh in collaboration with Chibnall….
29 June 2017 at 18:40 #59960@wolfweed, @nick and @blenkinsopthebrave–
that seems credible if there is a regeneration reveal of some kind in Saturday’s episode. I do think it would be a bit much to tease a regeneration last week and not resolve it until Christmas, so I’d put money on us at least seeing the new Doctor’s face this week. Maybe that’ll be the cliffhanger with an announcement straight after or something.
I’m thinking Christmas will be very much something of a multi-Doctor affair…
29 June 2017 at 11:11 #59926Thanks for the interesting comments on the TLs which I plan to reply to. However, don’t want to derail the discussion here too far away from the episode in question so I’ve revived @phaseshift‘s excellent blog on the subject from a few years back and bumped it back onto the front page for ease of access….
29 June 2017 at 00:13 #59907@blenkinsopthebrave — I suspect you may have hit on something with that theory…. even if not, it’s a first-class bit of bonkerising….
28 June 2017 at 20:44 #59890@wolfweed — nah, not a massive surprise or anything.
28 June 2017 at 20:41 #59886@wolfweed — ooh, is that a Titan job? I didn’t know they were doing Pertwee ones.
I really wish someone would hurry up and do a trade paperback collection of the old Countdown strips from the 70s. I’d snap it up in an instant….
-
AuthorPosts
