The Doctor Who Thread.....

[mstrox 6,651]

Ask him whether he can release Gold’s series 10 as well!

[TBO1711 28]

Richard Penna have you tweeted Segun Akinola and how long did it take for him to tweet back to you?

 

[Richard Penna 3,686]

No, it's just obvious from his twitter page that he's active and responsive.

[TBO1711 28]

The only problem I have with them releasing Doctor Who on Disney Plus is we might not get a DVD release later

[Positivatee 327]

That was a problem ten years ago. 

[Sweeping Strings 2,357]

There are still those who like to own physical media ... I'm one of them. Have pre-ordered standard-def DVDs of The Power Of The Doctor and Doctor Who Am I?, the recent docu about the experiences of the writer of the McGann TV movie. Standard-def because both appear to be without extras, so the higher price for BluRays didn't seem worth it.   

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

I've finally caught up with THE POWER OF THE DOCTOR.

The only thing I can say is: "Thank fuck that's over".

[TBO1711 28]

What I didn’t like about the Chris Chibnall/Jodie Whittaker is that they made it that Galifrey and the timelords were created because of the doctor but in fact Galifrey and the Timelords existed before The Doctor was born

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

Timelords: dry, dusty senators, peaceful to the point of indolence.

[Dave 217]

Didn't they answered the question of the questions with this timeless children plot? Doctor Who?

 

I have yet to watch Series 13 and the surrounding specials but so far it's by far the weakest run of post 2005 DW... The best episodes of Whittaker Who (Spyfall Part 1 & The Haunting Of Villa Diodati) where weaker than the worst episode of Davies' and Moffat's run imho...

[Tallguy 3,385]

1 hour ago, TBO1711 said:

What I didn’t like about the Chris Chibnall/Jodie Whittaker is that they made it that Galifrey and the timelords were created because of the doctor but in fact Galifrey and the Timelords existed before The Doctor was born

 

And they told you you (and the Doctor) are wrong about that. I might not like it for lots of reasons, but it isn't like they went "Oh damn, we did think about that!"

[DarthDementous 1,059]

On 6/11/2022 at 11:39 PM, TBO1711 said:

What I didn’t like about the Chris Chibnall/Jodie Whittaker is that they made it that Galifrey and the timelords were created because of the doctor but in fact Galifrey and the Timelords existed before The Doctor was born

Neither. It harms the set up of this unbelievably ancient society falling into decadence as a result of millennia of uncontested rule thanks to the ability to wield great temporal and regenerative powers

[Sweeping Strings 2,357]

RTD may not retcon the Timeless Child stuff, but there's nothing to stop him just ignoring it.   

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

Imo, ignoring The Timeless Child just confuses the issue. He's got to confront it head on, and either continue with it, or retcon. 

[Sweeping Strings 2,357]

Maybe the 'degeneration' back to Ten has got something to do with it. 

[Richard Penna 3,686]

Going back to Ten is to win back confidence and fans. If it helps with the story, that's probably a bonus.

[IheartMelissaBenoist 35]

On 06/11/2022 at 6:39 AM, TBO1711 said:

...but in fact Galifrey and the Timelords existed before The Doctor was born

Um, we do know we're talking about a fictional television show, right? "Fact"? 

 

I hate the Timeless Crap as much as the next fan, though I chuckle at how it resolves the "Brain of Morbius" continuity issue(s). But I don't believe there is anything in the show (or spin-offs or merchandise, etc.) that fundamentally prohibits the existence of earlier incarnations before Hartnell. I wish there were, but I'm not aware of any off the top of my head. And, no, "He's called the First Doctor" doesn't count.

 

Anyway, this is the kind of stuff that makes being a fan fun (and frustrating). It's all part of the whole big shebang that is "Doctor Who". And I love it.

[Docteur Qui 1,544]

I mean, there's also nothing in the show that fundamentally prohibits an episode depicting the entire run of the series as having been dreamt up by a young Sydney Newman asleep in the waiting room before he goes in to see some BBC executives in 1962. Doesn't mean it's particularly good telly. Some things are better left to the imagination, and the idea of pre-Hartnell Doctors, for me, is one of those things.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

The "Brain Of Morbius" continuity issue was nothing more than an in-joke, by Philip Hinchcliffe, and Christopher Barry, as was "Robin Bland".

Twice, the first Doctor has said "I'm the original, you might say". There's no doubt in this DW fan's mind that Hartnell is the first Doctor.

[Tallguy 3,385]

6 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

The "Brain Of Morbius" continuity issue was nothing more than an in-joke, by Philip Hinchcliffe, and Christopher Barry, as was "Robin Bland".

Twice, the first Doctor has said "I'm the original, you might say". There's no doubt in this DW fan's mind that Hartnell is the first Doctor.

 

I'll argue against interest and point out that there was no doubt in the Doctor's mind that the first was the first. The alleged clever bit was that the Doctor (and the Master) didn't know either.

 

I would suspect that there are far fewer people who disliked Jo Martin's Doctor (I would bet RDT is a fan) than those who just dislike the newly invented history to go with her.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

Timeless Child = Total Cobblers.

Retcon, now!

[IheartMelissaBenoist 35]

9 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

The "Brain Of Morbius" continuity issue was nothing more than an in-joke, by Philip Hinchcliffe, and Christopher Barry, as was "Robin Bland".

Twice, the first Doctor has said "I'm the original, you might say". There's no doubt in this DW fan's mind that Hartnell is the first Doctor.

 

Granted, an in-joke, certainly. But now we have an "official" explanation for those extra faces ("How long have you lived?"). Which, now I come to think of it, would the Fourth Doctor have seen and/or noticed those earlier (in-joke) faces in the battle, and wonder who the heck they were? Hmm. (No, they weren't Morbius, based on the dialogue occurring at the time.)

 

Anyway, is it just me or does the cover to issue 584 of Doctor Who Magazine look so RIGHT?

 

[Sweeping Strings 2,357]

Yes. Yes, it does. 

Apparently Disney's involvement will see the per-episode budget go up to around 10 million ... keep a tight hold on those creative control reins RTD/Bad Wolf Productions/the Beeb, for God's sake. That's the type of money that gives me horrible visions of Disney execs being all *Sooooooo ... the Doctor's ship. Does it HAVE to be that Police Box thing? Isn't that a little ... TOO quirky?* etc.   

[Marian Schedenig 8,192]

31 minutes ago, Sweeping Strings said:

Apparently Disney's involvement will see the per-episode budget go up to around 10 million ... keep a tight hold on those creative control reins RTD/Bad Wolf Productions/the Beeb, for God's sake. That's the type of money that gives me horrible visions of Disney execs being all *Sooooooo ... the Doctor's ship. Does it HAVE to be that Police Box thing? Isn't that a little ... TOO quirky?* etc.   

 

I'd worry more about what happens when the revenue no longer matches the budget. Would Disney just throw the Doctor in the vault and let him rot there, rather than giving the franchise to someone else if they're no longer interested in it themselves? Wouldn't surprise me.

[Docteur Qui 1,544]

I'd also worry about if/when RTD steps down as executive producer of the show. It's one thing for Disney to let him have control but another thing entirely for his eventual successor. That said, that's possibly why Bad Wolf productions is the driving force of the new deal, to ensure that the balance of control remains constant in the future.

 

10 hours ago, Tallguy said:

I would suspect that there are far fewer people who disliked Jo Martin's Doctor (I would bet RDT is a fan) than those who just dislike the newly invented history to go with her.

 

Count me as one of those - Jo Martin's Doctor is thrilling and she did a wonderful job in the role, which is why I didn't completely write the idea off when it happened. But she easily could've just been another "lost" regeneration between established ones, à la John Hurt. It's not as if Chibnall was averse to just repeating what others had done first and better; "The Power of the Doctor" plays like a greatest hits record of RTD's era, right down to the camp Master dancing along to a pop song while enacting his plan.

[TBO1711 28]

William Hartnell Was the first doctor but the whole idea that Chris creates that Galifrey and the timelords were created because of the doctor is absurd

[Tallguy 3,385]

I suddenly feel like watching The Deadly Assassin.

[Sweeping Strings 2,357]

RTD has said that the reason for the outfit regenerating as well at the end of Power Of The Doctor was in case the image of Tennant in Whittaker's outfit was used to mock drag culture etc. 

My oh my, what a sensitive little world we live in now.   

[HunterTech 990]

Except the Master already wears 13's outfit in the special, so there seems to be a communication breakdown if this was purely RTD's choice. It isn't even that feminine an outfit, so I can't help but feel like people will only think such now because it was brought up as a concern (and thus they might as well have not bothered).

 

(Was gonna say something about this maybe being an attempt to combat against rageclick YT channels getting easy content fuel out of current DW being divisive, but again it's counterintuitive now that it's on headlines. They might think it's Chibnall's final fuck you or something.)

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

It's interesting that no-one had an issue with 13 wearing 12's outfit.

[Tallguy 3,385]

15 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

It's interesting that no-one had an issue with 13 wearing 12's outfit.

 

No it isn't. That was just life up until 15 minutes ago.

[DarthDementous 1,059]

4 hours ago, HunterTech said:

Except the Master already wears 13's outfit in the special, so there seems to be a communication breakdown if this was purely RTD's choice. It isn't even that feminine an outfit, so I can't help but feel like people will only think such now because it was brought up as a concern (and thus they might as well have not bothered).

 

(Was gonna say something about this maybe being an attempt to combat against rageclick YT channels getting easy content fuel out of current DW being divisive, but again it's counterintuitive now that it's on headlines. They might think it's Chibnall's final fuck you or something.)

These are not equivalents, The Master wearing Jodie’s outfit is played like it’s a mockery and an unsettling violation of The Doctor. Ironically that’s the exact kind of thing RTD is referring to that he wanted to avoid with David’s scene

[Docteur Qui 1,544]

5 hours ago, Sweeping Strings said:

RTD has said that the reason for the outfit regenerating as well at the end of Power Of The Doctor was in case the image of Tennant in Whittaker's outfit was used to mock drag culture etc. 

My oh my, what a sensitive little world we live in now.   

It’s the same world we’ve always lived in.
 

But the people who were previously denied a voice are now audible.

[Tom Guernsey 2,284]

1 hour ago, Docteur Qui said:

It’s the same world we’ve always lived in.
 

But the people who were previously denied a voice are now audible.

Agreed. Having said that, while I understand RTD’s reasoning and

tactfulness, I probably would have invented an in-universe explanation or put out a “you’ll have to find out when it goes out” kind of tease rather than making point of flagging the “real” reason (although I imagine he might have one up be sleeve anyway).

 

While I’d generally consider myself a pretty woke person, even I was a bit surprised at that level of sensitivity around something like this, especially, as has been noted, given that Jodie Whittaker’s costume was essentially baggy trousers/dungarees. I guess in the past, her outfit would have been considered fairly tomboy-ish rather than specifically feminine. It’s some distance from “David Tennant in a dress” which might have seemed a bit crass and insensitive (even if entirely consistent within the logic of the show).

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Yes, the people who are too sensitive about everything are now very audible.  The main people who've been given a voice are fussy hall monitors who have everybody wound up tighter than a drum.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

One of the funniest moments in classic DW, is when Jon Pertwee gets dressed up as a washer woman.

[Sweeping Strings 2,357]

Tennant's 6ft+ ... I'd have thought maybe getting a visual gag out of the bottoms of the trousers that were 3/4 length on Whittaker now being up around the Doctor's knees somewhere would've been harmless enough. But whatever.      

[Tom Guernsey 2,284]

3 hours ago, Sweeping Strings said:

Tennant's 6ft+ ... I'd have thought maybe getting a visual gag out of the bottoms of the trousers that were 3/4 length on Whittaker now being up around the Doctor's knees somewhere would've been harmless enough. But whatever.      

I’m inclined to agree. I don’t think m/any people would have thought much of it. Aha well, I can’t get too worked up about someone being a little too sensitive than the opposite and it makes no difference to the show. I’d be amazed if RTD didn’t come up with some clever in-show reason for it (the TARDIS detected the tenth doctor and provided appropriate clothing automatically, that kinda thing). 

[HunterTech 990]

5 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

Yes, the people who are too sensitive about everything are now very audible.  The main people who've been given a voice are fussy hall monitors who have everybody wound up tighter than a drum.

 

Except the show being hampered by moral guardians being up in arms about the program has always been a thing since at least the Tom Baker era.

 

Really, this is more a display of corporate think in regards to touchy material, where they would rather just avoid it entirely than tactfully address it, since they care more about getting the views than if they're sending the right message. Of course, it's a little harder to argue that when it's a decision by the creative team themselves (especially when there's likely to be an in-universe reason for it), but it's generally where that mindset comes from (instead of going off whatever random tweet might make the show lose viewers, since that stuff can also be faked/exaggerated).

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

By all the saints, get some perspective!

RTD is Back. Tennant is back.

What the hell are we bitching for? 

[DarthDementous 1,059]

1 hour ago, HunterTech said:

 

Except the show being hampered by moral guardians being up in arms about the program has always been a thing since at least the Tom Baker era.

 

Really, this is more a display of corporate think in regards to touchy material, where they would rather just avoid it entirely than tactfully address it, since they care more about getting the views than if they're sending the right message. Of course, it's a little harder to argue that when it's a decision by the creative team themselves (especially when there's likely to be an in-universe reason for it), but it's generally where that mindset comes from (instead of going off whatever random tweet might make the show lose viewers, since that stuff can also be faked/exaggerated).

Here’s the full reasoning. RTD has always been very much aware of the marketing and public perception side of things, Doctor Who’s reputation is in the absolute pits at the moment and so you have to play this thing tactfully. You only get the luxury of unabashedly doing what you want when you’re on top of the world again:

 

Quote

This is the first time since 1966 – the Hartnell-to-Troughton transformation – that the Doctor’s clothes have regenerated too. “I was very certain that I didn’t want David to appear in Jodie’s costume,” states Russell. “I think the notion of men dressing in ‘women’s clothes’, the notion of drag, is very delicate. I’m a huge fan of that culture and the dignity of that, it’s truly a valuable thing. But it has to be done with immense thought and respect. With respect to Jodie and her Doctor, I think it can look like mockery when a straight man wears her clothes. To put a great big six-foot Scotsman into them looks like we’re taking the mickey.

 

“Also, I guarantee you it’s the only photograph some of the papers would print for the rest of time. If they can play with gender in a sarcastic or critical way, they will.

 

We could have the Doctor dressed as a knight, or dressed as God, or dressed as William Hartnell, and the only photo they’d print would be of David in what they considered to be women’s clothes. Then it becomes weaponised – as a mockery of feminine traits, a mockery of drag, of that culture. So that was never going to happen. 

“Knowing that David was coming in, I was absolutely certain that the clothes would regenerate. Nothing would’ve changed my mind.”

 

 

[HunterTech 990]

I of course was only speaking in general terms, cause I expect RTD to be a gentleman about these matters, to which the quote absolutely proves.

 

I just dislike the easy assumption that it's to appease the easily offended, since as he mentions, the idea that it could be used to weaponize attacks against minorities is fairly prevalent still. I guess it's a harder thing to picture for some when you don't have to worry too much about your background getting suppressed.

 

(Evidently, I find it really strange that these have been my first few posts in this thread. Guess I might as well lose any remaining credibility by saying my knowledge of the franchise stems from two super fans I follow, soooooooo yeah, probably need to fix that soon.)

[DarthDementous 1,059]

4 hours ago, HunterTech said:

I of course was only speaking in general terms, cause I expect RTD to be a gentleman about these matters, to which the quote absolutely proves.

 

I just dislike the easy assumption that it's to appease the easily offended, since as he mentions, the idea that it could be used to weaponize attacks against minorities is fairly prevalent still. I guess it's a harder thing to picture for some when you don't have to worry too much about your background getting suppressed.

 

(Evidently, I find it really strange that these have been my first few posts in this thread. Guess I might as well lose any remaining credibility by saying my knowledge of the franchise stems from two super fans I follow, soooooooo yeah, probably need to fix that soon.)

Ah okay I understand you better now, I also dislike the assumption that it's to appease the easily offended as I don't think that's the dimension in which the decision was made

[HunterTech 990]

Given literally the last program RTD made, this sort of decision is definitely not one he'd make lightly.

I guess to stay more on track with the general atmosphere of the thread, I've certainly grown actively more interested in the franchise in recent times. In the past, I'd always hear about how messy Moffat's run of the series was, and then subsequently getting tired by the vitriol the Chibnall era brought in spite of any legitimate critiques one has with it. And yet, a couple of factors (mainly from rediscovering someone I used to follow due to his association with a different chap, a wonderful set of retrospectives by a YTer, and just finding the theme song to be the coolest thing ever) has made me want to give the show a proper watch. Because I'm bad at generally investing in media, I'm a bit slow to actually watch anything that isn't fan productions, but I am considering starting from Tom Baker based on a recommendation I saw.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

1 hour ago, HunterTech said:

...I am considering starting from Tom Baker based on a recommendation I saw.

Series one, episode one: "An Unearthly Child".

That's where you start.

[HunterTech 990]

Do I really want to deal with the whole missing episodes thing? (I know 3 doesn't have any, but it's a less ideal starting point I'm told.) Admittedly, I'm finding I probably would like something from every Doctor, so I wouldn't mind going back. I guess I just find myself a little more intrigued with 4 onwards.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

I hear what you're saying, but the missing episodes will always be with us (or, rather, they won't ). It's a fact that every DW fan has to accept.

I can understand why one would wish to start with Baker: T, but, for me, starting at the very beginning, with the first Doctor (the original, you might say ), one gets a sense of both the history of the show, and a history of the times in which it was made and broadcast.

The Baker: T era didn't just happen, in the same way that the Eccleston era didn't just happen. Everything about DW had led up to those events.

Sorry if I sound a little "fanatical", but DW is my all-time favourite show. It has been ever since I saw Pat Troughton in "Evil Of The Daleks", in 1967, and I will guard its history, its popularity, and its influence, jealously.

[Sweeping Strings 2,357]

11 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

I hear what you're saying, but the missing episodes will always be with us (or, rather, they won't ). It's a fact that every DW fan has to accept.

I can understand why one would wish to start with Baker: T, but, for me, starting at the very beginning, with the first Doctor (the original, you might say ), one gets a sense of both the history of the show, and a history of the times in which it was made and broadcast.

The Baker: T era didn't just happen, in the same way that the Eccleston era didn't just happen. Everything about DW had led up to those events.

Sorry if I sound a little "fanatical", but DW is my all-time favourite show. It has been ever since I saw Pat Troughton in "Evil Of The Daleks", in 1967, and I will guard its history, its popularity, and its influence, jealously.

Some would doubtless take your last sentence there and accuse you of 'gatekeeping'. Not me ... it's a positive, noble and worthy thing IMO.   

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Personally when I decided to dive in to classic Who, I watched the Baker and Davison eras first… then went back to Pertwee… then forward to McCoy… then Baker 2…. and only after all that did I go back to the 60s.

 

Haphazard, sure, but I enjoyed it.

[Tallguy 3,385]

You start where you think you will enjoy it the most.

 

Sorry NOF but for almost nobody is that An Unearthly Child. Those old episodes certainly have value and I've really come to love and appreciate Hartnell and what an unrepeatable performance he gave. (Sorry Mr. Bradley. You are doing your own wonderful thing.)

 

Tom Baker is not a bad bet. The star is charismatic and can get you over the terrible effects and cheap production values. And he really is kind of the definitive ideal of what the Doctor is.

 

I might suggest (and it sounds like you're kind of doing this) getting some Baker's under your belt and then maybe dabble in the earlier Doctors. Certainly watch the first episode. (I am just watching The Dalek Invasion of Earth for the first time after 40 years of watching Who and I admit I am loving it.)

 

One thing I would strenuously recommend: Watch them as episodes, not as movies. (That's almost any era of Who.) They were made to hold your attention for 30ish minutes. If you get into (for example) Pertwee, Inferno CANNOT hold your attention for 6ish hours.

 

2 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

Personally when I decided to dive in to classic Who, I watched the Baker and Davison eras first… then went back to Pertwee… then forward to McCoy… then Baker 2…. and only after all that did I go back to the 60s.

 

Haphazard, sure, but I enjoyed it.

 

Sounds like you did on purpose what just kind of happened to me.