"New Who! Who knew!" Topic

Sounds like there is a new modern doctor.

This time they have gone for a chap of colour. Personally, I feel this better than their last poor choice. I thought either a black or Indian actor would have been appropriate as they seem to feature heavily in British shows.

I know there was a black comedian who played the doctor in a sketch, probably a few.

However, it's still not the best choice, perhaps? Now he can change races??!! Though I suspect some differences among classic doctors, though I haven't checked. Scottish, English, so on???

That thing with Romanna (spelling?) Sure has a lot to answer for.

And on that. I guess the next doctor will be a species change. My guess is either a dog or a Dalek. Heck, why not both. If your screwing up a franchise, you have to go all in. "Extermi-bark!"

Please can't they just rest it a while then start over from the end of the classic series.

I'll add a comment, rather than bog down the opening post with waffle.

They have Russel t Davies back producing. Groan. So, more of the same tripe.

The new a male and younger again. Oh, did I mention Russel t Davies is back?

Can't they find an older man who isn't Peter Capaldi? I dropped out mid his run, it was just getting stupid, only took me 4 doctors to accept it. Thank goodness I did it then is all I can say (not judging by this post).

I really think they have jumped over every Jaws sequel + shark swarm (about the same level of quality entertainment as new who, shark swarm, not Jaws, Jaws is actually watchable).

So on…

Now he can change races

He's Gallifreyan. Who knows what he can do. (See what I did there?)

As long as Doctor Who doesn't reincarnate as a green women, s/he'll be safe from Captain Kirk… ;-)

…….. they manage to make what was an entertaining, SF action show in a comic book sort of way into a platform for putting across their take on modern issues, and added extra plot complexity. This latest change is another example.

Was a massive Dr Who fan as a child.

Watched a few of the reboot series when it came back with Chris Eccleston and hated it! have seen the odd episode here and there since and haven't changed my opinion.

I won't be tuning in for this either.

I'm happy to give Ncuti Gatwa a chance. I knew nothing about David Tennant nor Matt Smith when they got role and I ended up enjoying their respective tenures in the Tardis.

Pay attention at the back – we've already had a black female Doctor – not a "full lead character" but like John Hurt (who was briefly a great Doctor!) a previously unknown regeneration. There are a lot of those since the back story was completely rewritten (so that the "first Doctor" was actually the 1,000+ Doctor).

Sometimes I wonder how much people who complain that "now the Doctor is a woman, the Doctor is gay, the Doctor is…." actually watch the show.

I watched Eccleston (Okay Doctor, but some good stories), Tennant (terrific, though I think the romance was a mistake), and Smith (fantastic; truly quirky, yet he could pull off a depth of wisdom and sadness with a single look). As soon as the next doctor stuck his head out of the Tardis, I knew the show was in trouble— it was too obvious that he was trying to act quirky and different, without knowing how to BE quirky and different. By that point the story line had already gone down hill, and the writers had started having the doctor despise soldiers for no other reason than that they were soldiers, and I stopped pursuing the show… though in part that was also because my local library didn't order any further seasons. From what I hear from people I trust, I haven't missed anything worth viewing.

I've got nothing against racer-or-gender-swapping the Doctor; it's essentially an alien life force in temporary corporeal form; "it" can appear as whatever or whoever the creators wish. Doesn't bother me in the least. In the end it was the writing that turned me off, not the "new" Doctors.

My pet theory about Peter Capaldi's first season is that Matt Smith left a year early and they couldn't be bothered to rewrite the scripts. Some of the stuff that was a little cringe-worthy with Capaldi would probably have worked ok for Matt Smith.

Agree that the romance went on a bit with Tennant, I could have done with a touch less of that soap opera.

Minor correction— "race-or-gender"
I blame Autocorrect, because I can.

Sometimes I wonder how much people who complain that "now the Doctor is a woman, the Doctor is gay, the Doctor is…." actually watch the show.

Yep – you've got me.nicely skewered there. I've been around since the beginning of the show and never liked it or seen a complete episode. And I do all those things you mention. I guess the one thing I like about Dr Who is that it gives me a vehicle to indulge in lots of prejudices over something that doesn't matter one little jot. Cathartic.

DBDD

Why not wait and see, and not prejudge?

Basically, the classic show was a 30-40s (after his first regeneration) white man.

The recent tat tried to muck with formula. Never a good look.

The only hope I see, colour aside, is that RTD does what he did with CE back in 2005, and just start as if past events didn't happen. Just the doctor in his TARDIS and off you go.

That way they may actually be able to make a show that in some way resembles an actual attempt to follow the classic show and even new tat fans will just watch until a new game of thrones comes out again.

However a young black doctor does have alarm bells sounding.

For comparison imagine having Benedict Cumberbatch play black panther. May work, with make up? Someone in Hollywood is probably having that meeting right now.

If they are capturing enough viewers to pay the bills, then something must be working.

If they'd have a few good stories where the Doctor is not god-like, it might help?

However a young black doctor does have alarm bells sounding.

I can't hear them…..

William Hartnell was 55 when he was cast as the first Doctor
Patrick Troughton was 46
John Pertwee was 51
Tom Baker was 40
Peter Davidson 31
Colin Baker 30
Sylvester McCoy 44
Paul McGann 37
Christopher Eccleston 41
David Tennant 31
Matt Smith 28
Peter Capaldi 56
Jodie Whittaker 35
Ncuti Gatwa 29

So Peter Capaldi was the oldest Doctor ever (apart from John Hurt who was 73 when he played The War Doctor), William Hartnell just looked older….and Peter Davidson just looked younger….

And 30's – 40's – well, Ncuti Gatwa will be 30 in October, so really it's only Matt Smith, and even then only by a year or so.

According to your list the best doctors ie the original ones were all over 40. Maybe I should have said 40+. I apologize.

Oddly Sylvester McCoy is my other fav and I bailed the new tat during Peter Capaldi. Interesting.

It gets worse.

The "R" and "D" words have been dropped.

Hopefully just in relation to the actors colour. But if the LOTR films taught me anything, it's "do not trust a hope."

Better than watching new who, is watching the production train wreck play out. It's a pity but that's where we may be at.

Looking at modern trends, I may be onto something.

Several franchises have started one way, then had a huge change, and some people don't like that. The modern trend seems to be to go back and just ignore half. Examples:

Terminator dark fate (terrible) ignored 3+ (also terrible).

There have been plans for a batman to take off from Batman returns, ignoring forever and Robin (as much as I like these two. Dark, but with the needed splashes of colour, and ivy, of course). I believe some upcoming films may feature Michael Keaton as batman??

Aliens have had rumours of a new film to take off after Aliens (I still don't see the issue with 3 it's awesome).

Fingers crossed for Bond (the last installment was a great film, just a bad Bond film, most of this run really).

So why not Who? Just take off from the end of the 7th or 8th. Heck wrangle Paul McGann in for a few seasons, as originally planned. Ignore the modern tat entirely.

Stay on trend people!

I find it troubling that the BBC, if it still is – I heard Sony mentioned, has now appeared to have based two "different" doctors on precedents of their own, recent, conjuring.

Suddenly Time Lords can change from male to female (only in fan fiction), then suddenly guess who gets the lead role, what a year later?

Now there was apparently a black woman as a doctor just two years ago (I have no idea, I don't watch it). Now, guess who gets the gig?

I know there has been a production change or two, but it's still highly suspicious.

It would be nice for them to go back to cannon, ie classic for their inspiration.

I'm still waiting for the worst of it. I'm sure that will surface over next few months.

PS Should be amusing when certain groups realise a man has been getting this attention, when apparently a woman was the first coloured doctor. (Of course they are both wrong… Pertwee joke.)

Well….again a little out of date, perhaps as you say because you don't watch the show. Which does raise the interesting question as to how you know recent incarnations of the Doctor aren't as good as the old ones. And also the question as to why you seem to care so much. But anyway:

The Doctor's old foe The Master – a renegade Timelord – regenerated as a female in 2014, so that aspect has been part of the possibilities for almost a decade. When Missie/The Mistress regenerated she became male again in the form of Sacha Dhawan.

We don't actually know yet whether the Doctor was male or female in his/her/they first regeneration, or for that matter whether they were old or young in appearance, or what their skin tone was. Since the timeline has been completely rewritten we don't even know just how many hundreds of Doctors there have been or in fact the Doctor's actual age as that seems to have been pegged to William Hartnell having been the first Doctor, which we now know to not have been the case.

I was suffering the new tat into Capaldis run, so I've only missed one proper (thankfully, but wish I'd missed more).

Thus I know how bad the modern tat is. I haven't said anything against the doctors specifically, more the production choices, but that pretty well soils them anyway. You can't blame the actors, usually they are happy for the work and don't want to upset the paymaster.

I am a Doctor Who fan (you can thank me for this board), so I care very much about what the name is being slapped on. It's getting like National Lampoon.

They? What he was conjoined twins? Let me guess the master was the other side?

And as for the rubbish with the master, I don't recall a regeneration, let me know if I have that wrong. However I do recall a certain movie.

You talk about the modern tat as if it were cannon. There wasn't even a regeneration to link the 2005 season. Heck, I've got the book listing the ninth doctor as Richard E Grant. As it should be. Now, there's an idea! Is he still about?

The Master did regenerate in the classic era – at first they tried to cast people who looked like Roger Delgado, having an interim "zombie" version when the Master had exhausted his regeneration cycle.

In the Five Doctors he was offered a new regeneration cycle (so breaking the maximum number of regenerations rule is not a new thing from the modern series!) and chose to come back as someone who looks a lot like Roger Delgado, but since then he's been a youngish man, and Derek Jacobi and a woman. And who knows, maybe other incarnations we haven't seen (what did the Master do in the Time Wars?).

The numbering of the Doctors really got messed up with the introduction of The War Doctor who was (probably) Doctor number 9. Only we didn't find out about him until Doctor number 12. Who was therefore Doctor number 13…

Interestingly (!) in the classic (Tom Baker era) story Brain of Morbius images of pre-Hartnell Doctors were shown, so the new era story "rewriting" the timeline actually removed an existing internal inconsistency.

For which production got their fingers burnt for not using actors. Should have learnt their lesson trying to muck with formula.

I'm well aware of the master's regenerations. I was talking about the modern change to female. I'm not aware of that being shown, but am aware of him sliding up an Ambos nose in the movie. So, as much rot as it has become now, that seems more likely than magically turning into a woman, which timelords, more specifically their race, can't do.

I think we can agree that the modern stuff has gone to lengths to mess with the formula/Style/history. A clean slate could please everyone.

Since most of the episodes from the 1960's have been erased, I'm a bit surprised they haven't recycled the scripts from those early shows. I'd bet the storytelling was much better back then than it is now… ;-)

100% better.

Hartnell had the best stories.

Dalek invasion of earth an absolute masterpiece. A true television epic, and one of the longest Who stories. So good, infact, they turned it into a film. So they beat you to it there. Hmm… I could really go for a bowl of cereal right now.

The Romans. Try the fridge, need I say more? Top notch, or should I say, groovy baby?

They actually got the chance to act back then. In shots lasting longer than 3 seconds, basically recorded live, start to finish. Lucky so and sos. All we get now is rush, rush, gabble, gabble. Even with the more hyper antics of Troughton or Baker, at least the show paused for breath.

The problem with remakes is they are rarely better than the original.

I am glad Russell T Davies is back as the writer, it gives the new series a chance!

Of what? Thats the real question.

RTD is producing, not writing, as far as I know.

I suspect he is just going to be repeating past mistakes.

That said, if it's a fresh start like 2005, it may make the show less cringeworthy. Perhaps he's even learnt from his mistakes?? Maybe he won't repeat them??

However in 2005 he was departing form the classic formula, making it worse (although forgivable for the first season back, and should have been pulled into line by Tennent). Now RTD may make the show better (not best), so it's easy to see how bad it's become.

I share your hope, however, and all together now, "Do not trust a hope!"