Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 51 through 100 (of 717 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #61392
    Nick @replies

    @wolfweed @jimthefish

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

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

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

    #61385
    Nick @replies

    @jimthefish @blenkinsopthebrave

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

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

    #61364
    Nick @replies

    @blenkinsopthebrave

    The german soldier in the clip is in a WW1 uniform.

    #61360
    Nick @replies

    @all

    Could that be the petrified forest from the original Dalek story behind DB when he is first introduced ? I also wondered who the figure in the alcove is (or two  as there seems to be one behind DB shoulder to the right as well ?) in the scene when DB is using the chain to lift something. The figure appears to have trousers on, but the head reminded by of apetrified angel, but I dont think can be possible.

    @wolfweed

    Thanks for posting the trailer.

    @jimthefish

    War games link definitely seems possible to me.

     

    #61311
    Nick @replies

    @serahni

    I think I also said up earlier that we have to be careful that the quest for balance doesn’t become one of replacement instead of creation.  Gender swapping fictional characters is okay up to a point, but I’m not sure that the correct message to be sending out is that men don’t deserve ANY representation….For me, they will have got it right if the gender thing is acknowledged but rarely central to any of the storytelling….I want it not to matter.  I want the narrative to barely notice it.

    Apologies for mashing your statement together. In my opinion, gender swapping the Doctor shouldn’t matter at all, so long as the role reversal continues with the companion. We are bound to get a single male companion for Jodie eventually. We may not be able to avoid the romance element than RTD introduced, but so long as the other change in emphasis RTD and Moff introduced continues.

    Since 2005 we have had a series of well written female companions with significant characters and character development who in many ways have proved to be more human and saved the Doctor on many instances. If we now have a series of strong male companions, with similar interesting characters and character development, who continue to save the Doctor, when she gets her humanity wrong, or makes some other mistake, then the series will retain, if not enhance, positive role models for young boys.

    #61244
    Nick @replies

    That’s terrible news. Victoria was before my time, but I enjoyed the character and character development from the Target novels and few Troughton DVDs.

    Rest in peace Deborah.

    #61206
    Nick @replies

    @craig

    I knew from Broadchurch she was a great actress, but it was great to see her in a very different sort of role. After seeing that, I like her more than I thought I would. I’ll have to rewatch Attack the Block as well.

    @jimthefish @pstrong

    More jittery this time, because its all so new and because it might be easier to make the odd wrong step without any compass from the past as their is a new show runner as well. Even if it isnt perfect straight out of the trap, I have confidence that it’ll come good.

    Jim – One thing I don’t entirely agree with you, is that it must be a male companion. I much prefer multi-companions (with some tension between them) and I’d like to see how Jodie and Pearl would play off each other as well. I’m sure we’ll get a single male companion, but I’d like to see some variety before we do. The single, younger female companion (that has been the norm since 1970) really is getting a bit long in the tooth. Swapping roles for a younger (if that’s possible) male companion seems like a lack of imagination to me. If the male has to be older, then someone in their 50’s would be nice experiment.

    #61198
    Nick @replies

    @jimthefish @craig

    Just watched the adult life skills short. Thanks for discovering this. Its fantastic – a very warm and charming watch. Great acting too. Definitely a must watch.

    I’ll watch the full film tomorrow.

    #61186
    Nick @replies

    @wolfweed

    I loved John’s Tardis dress. His speech was excellent. Its a shame the rest of it wasn’t posted as well.

    #61184
    Nick @replies

    @antaus

    Give or take 50 % of the Earth’s population is female. When making films and TV stories based on what were once considered male genre (action, sci-fi, comic based stories etc) the producers are doing no more than maximising their potential audience by changing stories and characters to appeal to a broader audience. Much as I’d like to think their motives were different, in most cases I suspect its a mostly business decision for them (just like including asian or chinese characters and special versions which highlight some characters more than others depending on the region where it is being shown). Political correctness has nothing at all to do with this trend.

    Looking at the bigger picture, many of these long term/older characters were written/invented for modern western audiences 40 or more years ago. At that time, it was virtually unheard of for leading characters to be female. So they were written male, by a generation of mostly male writers who were born more than 70 years ago, when the society was very different from today.

    Society has changed, writers, producers have also changed. Characters which were originally written as male, may not actually be male “only” these days. Doctor Watson, an Army doctor, could be either male or female in the real world now. Why then shouldnt the character be capable of being played by either gender. When Conan Doyle was writing Holmes and Professor Challenger there were not any female detectives and very few female scientists (Marie Currie being an obvious example). This is not true any more.

    To address your other point, why would anyone recast Wonder Woman as Wonder Man, when we already have Superman, Batman, Captain America, Thor, Ant Man and the rest ? Why changer Miss Marple to Mr Marple, when there is Poirot, Father Brown, Holmes, Cadfael, Wallender and all the others to numerous to mention. This sort of recasting isn’t necessary and wouldn’t be particularly interesting to watch.

    I think you should ask yourself, just which female Film, TV or Book roles do you really want to see gender swapped ? List them and then we can discuss and you might just provide some evidence to support your argument. I have a lot of sympathy for the traditionalist argument that a role has been male and should remain male because that is what you feel most comfortable with. However, its not an argument that can support never experimenting, telling new versions of the tales by swapping gender.

    #61165
    Nick @replies

    @cloisterbell

    I have seen Jodie in Broadchurch and in Attack the Block (but I didnt realise that was her until she was cast as the Doctor). That’s enough for me to know she’s a good actor. However, I’m not yet convinced she is the right choice. I can only make my mind up on that when I’ve seen her in the role delivering her and Chibnall’s vision next year.

    She will most probably deliver a “good” performance, but maybe not a great one. The great portrayal’s have been by actors who have found something else within themselves that has elevated their performance delivering a convincing alieness (the best three in my opinion are Troughton, Tom Baker and Capaldi). Right now, I haven’t seen anything in Jodie’s performances I’ve seen that suggests she was that quirky unknown factor, that I thought Phoebe Waller-Bridge had (out of the favourites list).

    We’ve never had a post dealing with say, who we would like to have seen cast as a female Doctor. I don’t think there’s much point in saying great it’s Jodie, but I would have preferred X or Y instead anymore. However, if you spent time on the spoilers thread, you’ll see many of us suggesting we’d like to have seen Michelle Gomez or Pearl take over. If Alex Kingston hadn’t played River, she would have been on my potential list as would have Parminder Nagra also of ER fame. Romola Garai and Andrea Riseborough are other actors who’d have been on my potentials list.  However, we don’t get to choose. Chibnall and the actors themselves do.

    #61152
    Nick @replies

    @wolfweed

    At the time, I thought the Terror of the Vervoids (if that was what it was called) wasnt a bad story, although it seemed to get confused in the middle and scenes were included but then never followed up. I wasnt that impressed with the first story and I think i missed an episode of the second story, but I remember that it wasnt that bad (but not that memorable either). The end was ok, but I think Pip & Jane did as good a job as anyone could when Robert Holmes died without completing both parts of the end.

    #61151
    Nick @replies

    @thane15

    @wolfweed has given the basic facts of who JNT was. Pip and Jane Baker were a husband and wife writing team, who had (I think) a decent cv as writers. I’ve no idea how they came to end up writing for Who.

    JNT, who had worked on Who behind the scenes over the years, took over as producer for Tom Baker’s last season as the Doctor and was instrumental in getting him to move on. I think he did a pretty reasonable job that season and cast Peter Davidson, Colin Baker and Sylvester McCoy. He ran into a few problems of his own making. He was extremely interested in promoting Who, especially in the US, where he spent a lot of time. In some ways he was instrumental in formalising Who fandom.

    But, he started to do the stories he thought the fans wanted (and was listening to a rather small group of people, lead by Ian Levine). “Canon” and Past story continuity became a big issue around the alongside bringing back old foes (many of whom the core audience didnt know or care about). It was alost story ideas by lot drawing. The Doctor’s costumes were meant to call back to Tom Baker’s zaniness, but putting question marks and silly colours rather than more every day clothes was a really poor idea.

    He also started celeb guest star performances. Whilst this might not have been a bad idea, some of the casting didnt make much sense from a character point of view, which when combined with comic or overacted performances, meant that it didnt work very often. Most of this was done to promote Who, and increase ratings.

    He didnt have any writing back ground. Whilst that shouldn’t have been a problem, I understand he left that side of things to his script editors (one of whom – Eric Saward – he felt out with in a very large way), who weren’t always on the same wave length as him. A lot of stories ended up being confused and confusing as a result.

    Broadly speaking, the Peter Davidson years were ok (with one or two notable exceptions). It went down hill with Colin Baker. Colin’s characterisation of the Doctor (starting out as unlovable and somewhat nasty and finally ending up as nice) might have been ok, but Colin was too unlikable. A lot of the stories around this time were quite poor and even the ones that werent, often got a bit confusing. Things were often over-lit as well, so there was often a lack of atmosphere and suspense.

    None of these things helped the ratings. BBC bosses thought the show was out of ideas and wanted (and did) to cancel it. There was a public campaign (by Levene and JNT supported by the newspapers) to get the show back that worked – at the price of getting rid of Colin Baker and making some significant changes. Around the same time, JNT was told (I believe) that if he left (as he wanted to) he would be replaced so stayed on. In a final effort to turn things around, he appointed Andrew Cartmel as script editor, who brought in new, younger writers (some of whom were fans). Broadly speaking, the turnaround was working, but it was too late.

    No doubt others will correct my mistakes and disagree with my menory, but that’s my potted history of the JNT years.

    #61144
    Nick @replies

    @wolfweed

    Gosh I hope you’re right there. Kris as companion would be a terribly boring idea – cute Tardis couple.

    #61129
    Nick @replies

    @wolfweed

    This is a somewhat false list as a lot of “BBC” salaries are paid by production companies and not the BBC. Without similar disclosures from the rest of the UK industry there is no context.

    The main thing that (fails to) surprise me is that the real talent (actors, directors, writers crew etc) are not the highest earners; most of whom seem to be news readers and presenters. The gender differences aren’t surprising, although I don’t think that it necessarily follows that people working on the same programme should necessarily be paid the same. However, in the medium term this can only makes these particular difference a thing of the past.

    #61128
    Nick @replies

    @robynhod

    Thanks you for clarifying your thoughts. If you look around, you’ll find many people who doubt or question Chibnall’s suitability as show runner, although all/most of us are keeping an open mind. I havent come across the argument that he is a moral crusader (I never particularly noticed anything on his Torchwood or Who work that I would have considered to be of that nature), although there is clearly part of his intention with Broadchurch to make certain moral points. I watched all three Broadchurch series, moralising isnt the largest negative criticism I would have made.

    Going back to series 11, I agree with you, there are things that Chibnall could choose to put on screen that I would consider inappropriate either for Who or in respect of the character of the Doctor. But until he does any of those things, if he does, then we cant discuss them. If you look back at some of @jimthefish ‘s posts on this topic (and elsewhere) he articulates some potential issues with Chibnall’s story telling style, which I certainly agree with. However, all; we can do is wait and see what he does.

    I look forward to reading your critique on these pages next year.

    #61114
    Nick @replies

    @robynhod

    I agree with you, that playing the Doctor is a role that leaves a lasting mark on an actor’s career. That could be a bad thing – perhaps it was true to a degree for Tom Baker (although he was also noted as being quite difficult as well). However, Jon Pertwee and Peter Davidson both had/have very significant post Doctor UK TV careers. This isn’t quite as true for either Colin Baker or Sylvester McCoy, but both were different sort of actors. Paul McGann remains a successful UK actor.

    Looking at more recent Doctor’s all three of them pre-Capaldi have continued to have successful and wide ranging careers in both UK and US TV. In fact the opening of US TV and film prospects, following appearing as the Doctor, is probably the largest difference compared to the past.

    We’ll have to wait and see how Jodie portrays the Doctor and Chibnall’s ideas appear on the screen. Until then, its impossible to have an opinion.

    #61109
    Nick @replies

    @hiker

    Welcome. I hope we see you contribute your thoughts on Jodie’s version of the Doctor next year as well as Capaldi and Tennant’s era.

    #61098
    Nick @replies

    @thane15

    Can you ignore that person’s gender preference? Because if you do you’re ignoring one of the things that makes them very special. If we don’t acknowledge that then we’re not acknowledging them and we’re not learning how to ‘be’ around this person which then lets them down?

    Thane

    On some levels that’s a hard question, but on the other hand it isnt 🙂 . For all my career, I have worked for female bosses, worked alongside women and had women work for me as well as men. It never made any difference to the job at the end of the day, nor did I feel that gender impacted the working relationship much either. Their sexual orientation was even less important. I think your point only becomes relevant when the nature of the relationship becomes deeper and more personal, but even then does it really matter ? One of my wife’s oldest friend is a gay male. I know him and his partner well. As couples, we have spent a lot of time together (sharing holiday homes together for example).  I can’t think of a single instance when their sexual orientation (or ours) has actually impacted on the friendship we have.

    #61097
    Nick @replies

    @lisa @tardigrade @genek1953

    I’d prefer to see Jodie play a Doctor who is female (rather than a female Doctor). Whilst I don’t think the gender element should be down played, I do think the essentials of the doctor’s character and behaviour should remain essentially the same. I think the point of having a gender change character should be to show that gender is not the primary thing going on. In that respect Lisa, I’d suggest that we’re quite similar in what we’d like to see.

    @tardigrade

    Of course, if McCoy had been a female cast, it is possible that that casting would have been blamed for the demise of the show, especially in hind sight. Of course it wouldnt have been the case. From what I’ve read, JNT had wanted to go and do something new for a while, but had been told that it would mean the end of Who as the BBC had no replacement producer. WE probably got 4 or 5 series more than we would have because he stayed on.

    It hard to go back to that time. I was in my early 20’s, but I think it wouldnt have caused anything likethe same impact as today. Whilst it was a highly visible show it wasnt held in any particular critical regard by the BBC or the bulk of the TV audience. Fandom, any on large scale didnt really exist. IF they had chosen a good female actor with some good stories, it would have been accepted quite quickly.

    I’m currently reading Running through the Corridors 2. On the Android Invasion, Rob and Toby write about their expectations because it was written by Terry Nation. Having watched it live, that amused me quite a lot. There was no expectation, because most of the audience wouldnt even have realised that it was written by him. I expect I knew he was the creator of the Daleks, but that didnt create any expectations for me. Terrence Dicks and Malcolm Hulke were the only well known writers to me , because they wrote the Target novelisations. The only things available which covered the past that I had then was the Making of book, the 10th anniversary glossy magazine and my memory of the really good stories. The wealth of guidebooks and the VND/DVD all came years later. Without all this history, things were much simpler and in some respects easier.

     

    #61082
    Nick @replies

    @robynhod

    As you suggest Chibnall in full control. If he hadn’t wanted to have a female Doctor, then he wouldn’t have done that and cast Jodie. keeping things the same as always was the safe and sensible thing to do, especially as he has only just taken over.  Brave is subjective I suppose, but given the very negative reaction in some quarters (which was expected by every body)  I would say that it has been a bold and/or brave thing to do.

    Whether Jodie is a success or not playing the Doctor, she’s a fine actress and I don’t see this harming her career at all. In fact being the first (and taking all the crap) will probably have the opposite effect.

    I don’t understand why you think this is an empty social gesture from 20 years ago, but I fully believe that this would have happened in the 1990s in pre-gap Who if the show hadn’t have been scrapped by the BBC.

    #61081
    Nick @replies

    @lisa @genek1953

    I dont see any reason why which Lord shouldn’t be genderless if that’s what Chibnall wants.

    If you want to be very specific (in terms of British peerages etc), then Lord is actually used as short hand form instead of the correct title (Duke, Count and the female equivalent Duchess, Countess etc). Traditionally wives of Lords were called Ladies, but the term in common usage, over the last 150 years or more, covers anyone from the lowest to the highest rank. I suppose you could make up Lordess if you wanted to.

    #61073
    Nick @replies

    @genek1953

    I read an interview that Peter Capaldi did (which I can no longer find or I’d post it) where he said he was playing the Doctor exactly as he thought a 2,000 year old alien would be. I can understand and accept his vision and that he has delivered exactly that. RTD and Chris Eccleston, followed by David Tennant had there own conception, based on the combination of age, but heavily influenced by effect of genocide and survivor guilt. Matt, being the youngest ever casting, wanted to play with young looking, but old inside.

    The thing about regeneration is that there’s no reason why the change need just be physical. I dont see why a mental/attitude rejuvenation should also be possible. I hope to see Chris Chibnall and Jodie Whitaker do something along those lines, where we get to see a less world weary, fun Doctor without the baggage, while also reflecting the age and alien outlook.

    #61070
    Nick @replies

    @jimthefish

    Of course. I’ve enjoyed some spars here with you and others; I’ve had my mind changed often enough (although sometimes not for months later).

    By arguing against the traditionalist standpoint, you’ve managed to change @exfan ‘s point of view to a degree and I hope we collectively have at least planted the idea that it might be alright and perhaps even persuaded some of the negative “I’m not watching it ever again” to give Jodie a go next year (even if they havent admitted it openly). Maybe not yet, but people do dwell on things subconsciously and there’s plenty of time.

    But I understand where they are coming from at the end of the day. I seriously hated the D10/Rose love in from series 2, bad wolf bay candle in the wind and substitute Doctor hand-over from series 4, which certainly turned me against the thrust of what RTD did as show runner [ as a yet another aside: I admire his writing enormously; anyone who hasnt watched cucumber/banana really should].

    My sole justification is that I don’t believe that a 1,000 + year old alien could let alone would behave that way. It’s not a good argument and I’d have to give a huge amount of thought to think up some supporting or better justification. In something fictional, perhaps, there are some points of view which just cant be justified by a sophisticated argument.

    When we firmly believe in the merits of a change such as the casting of Jodie, then its easy to come across as a bit too evangelical and with not enough sympathy to the other persons opinion in the way that we write, especially if we think its a poor one or we’re in a hurry. I have certainly done this.

    We (collectively) seem to have pissed off Puro ( @Thane15 ) (if what I think my understanding of her final posts is right) by in her view, not justifying our point of view clearly enough  – stating opinions and not arguments – and by being somewhat repetitive in our arguments. But this is what we are now accusing the Traditionalist point of view of doing exactly the same.  [as another aside I am certainly missing her point of view on the debate with the traditionalists as well as female Doctor].

    So here I am, agreeing with your basic argument that all arguments should be justified and debated and yet recognising that it isnt always that simple.

    #61064
    Nick @replies

    @jimthefish

    Whilst I agree with the thrust of your argument, I (yes its a horseshit but) think you’re wrong on one thing. I think its perfectly reasonable to say that in my opinion the Doctor is a male character and should remain male. As an opinion, it doesnt need to be justified by an argument more than stating that the poster considers that a role which is traditionally been played by a male actor should remain so.

    Yes, those of us that disagree, can present lots of reasons and arguments to show that that this belief isnt reasonable and can’t really be validated any more, but I don’t see that negates those that believe that things shouldn’t change. Yes some of these people are sexist (and racist in due course), but certainly not all of them are.

    Looking the web, there are many making that point using misogyny, which is clearly wrong. However, I have seen replies and posts which are essentially using the same sort of cheap point as justification for the change. Neither points of view are appropriate in my opinion.

    #61060
    Nick @replies

    @genek1953

    I’m looking forward to seeing what Chibnall’s 5 year plan looks like too. I think they have to feature the Daleks annually, but apart from them, I think we should expect to see fewer recently created Monsters for a while. I expect Chris will want the chance to do his own team’s ideas (at least at first).

    #61059
    Nick @replies

    @craig

    no problem 🙂

    @mudlark @drben @holodeckguy @rorysmith

    I agree with Craig. I do hope she uses her natural accent. Whilst it might not be banned in the way it once was, we hear far too few accents on TV (or at least that’s how it seems to me living in London)

    #61045
    Nick @replies

    @drben

    I think the “official” name these days is Wessex coast (The heart is Dorset). So a South 🙂 . I assume the accent was realistic for the area, but to be honest I don’t know.

     

    #61042
    Nick @replies

    @drben

    She didnt in Broadchurch (although she did have a distinctive accent their too)

    #60959
    Nick @replies

    @jimthefish

    The one Amy/Rory story that I remember Chibbers wrote was the Hungry Earth (earth reptiles anyway). From what I remember, Amy & Rory both worked well there. In my opinion, the biggest problem with Broadchurch wasn’t the characters, character development (apart from the suicide that didnt happen) and location, but that the detective story was too much in the back ground (and not particularly well thought through in places). For this reason, I would always recommend watching the original Danish Killing, which, although equally flaky in places, managed to get the balance between the two elements better.

    Like you, I’d be very surprised if CC, Jodie and the team get this wrong. Even if they do, I dont think it would be the end of the world, or the end of Who for that matter.

    #60956
    Nick @replies

    @frostfair

    How will a female Doctor be treated differently, for example, when traveling in the past with its different attitudes to women?

    To my mind, the why the past or present time reacts to the Doctor is part of the fantasy element of the show. The Doctor gets to do everything he can, because of the nature of the character, not because of gender. Why then should there be any change ?

    Chris and his writing team are free to write this how they choose to. If the Doctor is treated differently because the character now has a female appearance, then at what point does Jodie stop portraying the Doctor and start portraying a new different character ? Of course, it will be different – in a new way, with a female slant, but essentially it needs to be no more than between any other regeneration. For example, Missy remained true to the essential nature of the Master, even at the end to be honest. The Master might have said he would never stand with the Doctor, but perhaps he’d forgotten how often he did just that alongside Pertwee.

    I’m glad you’re enjoying Happy Valley. There’s a third series coming next year I think. It’s one of the best things shown on British TV for quite a while.

    #60946
    Nick @replies

    @frostfair

    I dont think the dynamic should be that different. How would you write the relationship between the Doctor and Amy/Rory, for example, differently because the Doctor is played by Jodie Whitaker instead of Matt Smith. I dont see anything that would need to be changed from that Moff wrote. Yes of course, Jodie will play a different version of the character, but then so did David Tennant. Would any changes in the relationship dynamic to accommodate Tennant’s Doctor being any larger ?

    @lisa @glasgowboy @jimthefish @everyone

    It’s often written that Hartnell was playing the Doctor (and not the first Doctor), whereas everyone else has been playing the second, third etc Doctor. Jodie will be playing D15. The gender will have changed, but the character shouldn’t, more than the difference between Matt and Peter version. The key description needs to be a Doctor who is female in appearance Not a female Doctor.

    If Jodie, Chibnall and his writing team try to write the first female Doctor as anything other than a continuation of the line, as another original (female) Doctor – then @lisa and others will be right to claim this change is nothing other than a gimmick. At least that’s what I think right now.

    #60926
    Nick @replies

    @cookgroom

    Yes I would have liked that as well.

    #60925
    Nick @replies

    @glasgowboy

    I’m sure very many of us are sympathetic to the argument that a male character should remain male. I know I am. There is a point though, where I think you have to question why its such a big deal for the potential of roles becoming either gender.

    I don’t think “Jane Bond” is particularly believable today, but I think it will be in a few years, when front line gender equality is more obvious in the military. Why shouldn’t there be a “Shirley Holmes” ? I would tend to agree that if the TV show is based on the original novels set in Victorian London, then it would be wrong to do that, but if the setting is modern day then why not ? She can be a descendant if that makes things easier to accept.  It seems to me that maleness is not what makes Holmes a special character at the end of the day. I’m afraid the same is true for the Doctor in my opinion.

    Regarding your internet abuse point, I agree with you entirely. It’s not very edifying, regardless of the gender of the source. However, I think you have to put that into the context of the internet as a whole and the number of male commentators whose arguments are basically racist or misogynist. Unfortunately I don’t find blow back using similar language to be at all surprising.

    #60921
    Nick @replies

    @lisa

    The problem is that its the first time. I’m sure Hartnell fans would have written something similar in 1966. Once it becomes a routine option (and I include ethnicity in that statement) we’ll all wonder what the fuss was about.

    #60920
    Nick @replies

    @frostfair

    I’m not sure what it changes ? What do you think ?

    My immediate, personal preference would be to continue with Bill and avoid the lesbian crush angle. Not because there is an inherent problem with this, but because it would be unimaginative to say the least. The likely default might well become a younger male companion. I’d like to see something more varied than this over the series (just as I would when we return to a male Doctor some point down the line).

    #60899
    Nick @replies

    @mudlark @serahni @janetteb

    “Doctor Who dies” quite funny (especially with the increased frequency over the least few years), but a bit too close to the bone with casting Bonnie Langford. Much as I might have got a bit wound up once or twice recently, nothing has been as bad as that. Mind you, I admit my bias there was something about her voice I could never stand (talented as she undoubtedly is).

    #60876
    Nick @replies

    @holly110

    The timelords werent invented until 1969, some 6 years after the show was first created. The first “timelady” didnt appear until 1978. It’s never been explained how or why Timelords regenerate let alone how they reproduce – that’s all an assumption. They’re aliens; anything you can imagine is possible.

    #60865
    Nick @replies

    @jim4

    Welcome. I’m afraid, it’s seems you have missed out over the years. Doctor Who has always been an adventure in liberalism. It’s in the show’s DNA. Let’s face it, 1963 and 2017 are worlds apart in terms of what is or isnt possible for a whole bunch of people. The one thing this programme has done since 1966 is change. It would still be being made, if it hadn’t adapted over the years. This particular change is long overdue. This has nothing to do with any pink liberalist BBC agenda, it reflects the way that British Society and its expectations of itself have changed since 1963.

    #60862
    Nick @replies

    @holly110

    Welcome. I have been watching for as long, give or take a year. I hope that you’ll change your mind and give Jodie a chance. We have both been lucky enough to watch the first female “Doctor” during the early 1980’s – Romana. This really isnt that different.

    #60839
    Nick @replies

    @thane15

    Go back far enough and I’m there. I feared CC and the powers would put off doing this for another regen, so I’m very pleased. Fine actor as she is, I’m a little scared that Jodie might be a little conventional – I think the best Doctor’s have always had something different about them. To be honest, a little fear is to be expected with nearly every new Doctor as we cant know until we’ve seen it. I’m open minded and cant really wait to see what she does. I’m also a little more reassured about Chibnall, although I’m not entirely sure whether its such a good thing that he seems to have a strong preference for working with previous collaborators. Time will tell.

    All in all, something very positive has happened today.

    @wolfweed

    I rather guessed that would be a common topic. To be honest, I don’t care enough about the argument to bother listening or reading too much about such a narrow minded attitude. I can understand the male character should remain male argument, even if I don’t believe it anymore. The idea that it means you cant even stand to see how a female Doctor plays out before deciding, is something I’ve never been able to accept let alone understand.

     

    #60831
    Nick @replies

    @wolfweed

    I can only guess. care to enlighten us ?

     

    #60769
    Nick @replies

    @craig

    DT as the Master. I dont know if that’s possible, but I wouldn’t mind seeing what he’d do. I’m not sure I’ve seen him play a baddy. I was thinking we might see Eve Myles again.

    #60767
    Nick @replies

    @wolfweed

    thanks. excellent interview.

    #60757
    Nick @replies

    I’m glad that Chris Chibnall has actually done it. A female Doctor should certainly be interesting to watch. I look forward to seeing how Jodie will play the part and how she/Chibnall will play out the Doctor character arc. My only fear is that she is too seems to be somewhat conventional and therefore somewhat a “safe” choice, if that is possible in the circumstances.

    We all know that there is a certain section of the audience (as well as those who don’t form part of the audience) that will be very nasty about this and towards her in particular. That she has taken the part anyway, knowing that being the first will take all the flak, bodes well for her, I think.

    One note of caution. It seems Chris likes to work with people who are known quantities to him. I’m not sure whether this is a good sign for the future.

    #60695
    Nick @replies

    @jimthefish @craig @wolfweed @misterhoo

    Yes it does seem very likely to be JW. I do feel very sorry for Kris M – he certainly doesnt deserve all this shit. It’s not even his fault. The newspapers (and bookies) made him favourite, nothing he has done. Since he knows either way, I hope he’s laughing his head off, although I suspect there will be a lot of hurt as well. I’m glad to say no one on this site (that I’ve seen) has disrespected his ability as an actor even if some of us haven’t thought he was the right person for the role. Whether its him, JW or someone else, I wish them all good luck and will look forward to seeing what they do with the role.

    I have to say, I agree with @jimthefish, the BBC needs to change this process next time.

    @wolfweed I love the video

    #60687
    Nick @replies

    @wolfweed

    The Mail on Sunday has Jodie W on the front page….

    #60662
    Nick @replies

    @jimthefish @wolfweed

    I havent seen Jodie outside Broadchurch (that I recall anyway). Based on that, I just cant see her as the Doctor. I have the same feeling with Kris Marshall as well. They both seem too conventional. It’s not about their acting ability at all – nothing I can really put my finger on. That’s not to say that either couldn’t do it successfully, but they would both need to do something quite different from their default style (Kris M especially) to be successful (IMO). I always felt that Peter Davison never quite worked for the same reason (he was great in a very peculiar practice if you ever caught that).

    As you say, Phoebe Waller-Bridge seems to have a more unique vision, more unconventional which seems to fit best with playing the Doctor.

    #60657
    Nick @replies

    @wolfweed

    She had crossed my mind before, but that’s the first time I’ve read her name mentioned. The odds seem very low as well given that last time I checked (mid/late June) she wasn’t mentioned at all.

    Interesting indeed.

    @jimthefish

    Could this be the reason for a quick announcement ?

    #60643
    Nick @replies

    @wolfweed

    It’s been a while since I last stood next to one. The triangle around the Tardis key does seem to reinforce the three Doctor christmas story idea we recently discussed on the spoiler thread as @blenkinsopthebrave has just suggested

Viewing 50 posts - 51 through 100 (of 717 total)