Doctor Who

[TGC]

McGann is clearly a part of the main continuity as his face is seen on the show.

I do not mind a movie version idea. I'd rather it not be Depp. As good an actor as he is, just no. I am almost tired of him and his quirky roles.

[DFF]

I think the general idea is that the main timeline is that of the TV series, that’s why the other ARRU Doctor and the stage play Doctor are separate (you can argue about McGann though), however personally I’d rather see the Daleks adapted to a film or TV show without the Doctor involved, simply to see the other side of the daleks, namely then not losing all the damn time.

There is no argument about McGann, he is the canonical 8th Doctor.

[GhostMachine]

I think the general idea is that the main timeline is that of the TV series, thats why the other ARRU Doctor and the stage play Doctor are separate (you can argue about McGann though), however personally Id rather see the Daleks adapted to a film or TV show without the Doctor involved, simply to see the other side of the daleks, namely then not losing all the damn time.

There is no argument about McGann, he is the canonical 8th Doctor.

They've shown McGann's face at least twice in the series now. There was a book with pictures (drawn, not photos) of the Doctor's past incarnations and McGann was one of them. And near the end of Matt Smith's first episode as the Doctor, they showed all the past Doctors - including McGann.

Personally, I'd love it if there was some way to make some of the 8th Doctor's adventures outside the movie canon. Maybe some of the Big Finish audio productions? (But then I've never listened to any, so I don't know if there are things that would make that a problem)

Edited June 30, 2010 by GhostMachine

[Benji]

I call BS. I don't even want to give reason, it just sounds stupid.

Besides, how many times can people see Johnny Depp playing the same fucking role before they get sick of it? He's got less range than Keanu Reeves.

[AnnIQ Edison]

I call BS. I don't even want to give reason, it just sounds stupid.

Besides, how many times can people see Johnny Depp playing the same fucking role before they get sick of it? He's got less range than Keanu Reeves.

Now that sounds stupid. Depp may always choose the strange character but he does have a great range.

[Skummy]

Depp has great range if he works at it and researches a character, but name a film he's done since Fear & Loathing In Las Vegas in which he doesn't play Johnny Depp The Quirky Tim Burton-Friendly Anglophile Quirky But Loveable Quirky Outcast to some extent and I'll be amazed. It's high time people got over the idea that he can do no wrong, and I'd certainly rather not see him as the Doctor - not least of all because I know he'd play him as Johnny Depp The Bumbling Brit and, in which case, why not cast an English actor? And, in that case, why not cast whoever's presently playing The Doctor? And, in that case, why make a fucking film in the first place?

Grain of salt, massively. I doubt this will happen. But if it does, and it's anything but an absolute travesty, I'll eat several hats. Not to mention that if anyone were to write a Doctor Who screenplay, I'd rather it be almost anyone but RTD.

[Daniel Bryan]

Depp has great range if he works at it and researches a character, but name a film he's done since Fear & Loathing In Las Vegas in which he doesn't play Johnny Depp The Quirky Tim Burton-Friendly Anglophile Quirky But Loveable Quirky Outcast to some extent and I'll be amazed.

The Ninth Gate, Chocolat, Once Upon a Time in Mexico, the first Pirates of the Caribbean, Finding Neverland, Secret Window, From Hell, Blow, Public Enemies...

Depp does play a lot of characters who could be described as "quirky", but how does that translate into not having range? I mean, if he was playing characters with the same collection of quirks and mannerisms in every film, sure, but he's not. He's just in a lot of Tim Burton films, but everyone is weird in those, and even then he's not playing the same character; Ed Wood isn't Willy Wonka isn't Edward Scissorhands isn't Ichabod Crane. I don't get this idea that he's a one-note actor. He's probably one of the few actually good ones there is.

The proposed idea sounds terrible, gotta say. And I can't see a Doctor Who film working unless it focuses mainly on a Companion-type. Isn't the whole appeal of the concept that the Doctor can be doing something different in a new setting every week? The TARDIS is just a story generator and, considering it'll probably be a reboot, the Doctor doesn't have a set personality, so what can you take from that for a single 90 minute story? It'd just be a generic sci-fi movie with the Doctor Who name attached to it and maybe some Daleks.

Edited July 1, 2010 by The Dragon

[GhostMachine]

http://www.cad-comic.com/cad/20100702

:lmao:

[Skummy]

I'm not saying Johnny Depp's a "one-note" actor, just that there seems to be this idea going around that he's some kind of Messianic figure who can take any slightly off-kilter role and be perfect for it when I struggle to think of the last film he did which wasn't a complete dud, and in which his part wasn't somewhat phoned in - probably the first Pirates Of The Caribbean. He's not a bad actor, but I'm sick of his name being the go-to for practically every film role that comes up. The Riddler? Oh, it has to be Johnny Depp! Doctor Who? Johnny Depp. Syd Barrett? Johnny Depp. Ozzy Osbourne? Johnny Depp. Another Hunter S. Thompson alter-ego? Johnny Depp.

It seems like you can barely pitch a film without his name attached to it any more, and after the second two Pirates films, Willy Wonka, Imaginarium, Alice In Wonderland and Sweeney Todd, can we please put the idea that he can do no wrong to rest?

Anyway, the BBC have already said there are no plans for a movie, and Depp hasn't been approached.

[Jimmy]

Depp has great range if he works at it and researches a character, but name a film he's done since Fear & Loathing In Las Vegas in which he doesn't play Johnny Depp The Quirky Tim Burton-Friendly Anglophile Quirky But Loveable Quirky Outcast to some extent and I'll be amazed. It's high time people got over the idea that he can do no wrong, and I'd certainly rather not see him as the Doctor - not least of all because I know he'd play him as Johnny Depp The Bumbling Brit and, in which case, why not cast an English actor? And, in that case, why not cast whoever's presently playing The Doctor? And, in that case, why make a fucking film in the first place?

Grain of salt, massively. I doubt this will happen. But if it does, and it's anything but an absolute travesty, I'll eat several hats. Not to mention that if anyone were to write a Doctor Who screenplay, I'd rather it be almost anyone but RTD.

I see where you're coming from; but Depp in Public Enemies was pretty far removed from any of his quirky work; which, I do admit, is getting a little bit tedious. Though, I'll still always love his work as Jack Sparrow. The first Pirates Movie was magical because of his performance. I'd also argue that his performance in Once Upon A Time In Mexico was superb; and stole the show - without having to resort into his comfort zone.

But I agree - everytime a 'weird' character is up for casting - Depp seems to be at the forefront to play him.

[DFF]

The BBC and Steven Moffat have announced today that the transmission of the next series of Doctor Who, in 2011, will be split into two blocks, transmitting in spring and autumn.

The split transmission is the result of a request from Steven Moffat to write a new Doctor Who story arc which involves a big plot twist in the middle of the series. By splitting the series Moffat plans to give viewers one of the most exciting Doctor Who cliffhangers and plot twists ever, leaving them waiting, on the edge of their seats, until the autumn to find out what happens.

Steven Moffat said: "The split series is hugely exciting because viewers will be treated to two premieres, two finales and more event episodes. For the kids it will never be more than a few months to the next Doctor Who! Easter, Autumn, Christmas!!"

from: BBC Press Release

And from The Guardian, expanding on it a little.

The new series of Doctor Who will be split into two for the first time, with its showrunner, Steven Moffat, promising the show's biggest ever cliffhanger – "an earth-shattering climax".

Next year's 13-part series, the sixth since Doctor Who returned in 2005, will run for seven episodes and then return in the autumn for another six.

Moffat said the Easter "mid-season finale" would be a "game-changing cliffhanger".

He added that next year's Doctor Who would run as two separate series, allowing him to double the number of "event episodes" in the new run, and meant fans would never be more than a few months away from the next instalment of the hit BBC1 show.

"Looking at the next series I thought what this show needs is a big event in the middle," Moffat told the Media Guardian Edinburgh International Television Festival.

"I kept referring to a mid-season finale. So we are going to make it two series – seven episodes at Easter building to an earth-shattering climax, a cliffhanger we could never normally do because it would be too long before it came back. An enormous game-changing cliffhanger that will change everything.

"The wrong expression would be to say we are splitting it in two. We are making it two separate series.

"What I love about this idea is that when kids see Doctor Who go off the air, they will be noticeably taller when it comes back. It's an age for children. With an Easter series, an autumn series and a Christmas special, you are never going to be more than few months from the new series of Doctor Who.

"Tart that I am, we will now have two first nights and two finales, twice as many event episodes as we had before."

Moffat, who was also responsible for BBC1's acclaimed updating of Sherlock Holmes, took over stewardship of Doctor Who from Russell T Davies last year. His first series in charge was acclaimed by viewers and critics alike.

Moffat gave festival delegates a first glimpse of this year's Christmas special, guest-starring Michael Gambon and Katherine Jenkins.

Moffat said he chose Matt Smith as his Doctor on the very first day of casting.

"He has that air about him, he's like a young man built by old men from memory," he added.

He first saw Karen Gillan, who plays the doctor's assistant Amy Pond, on video and was worried that she was "wee and dumpy". When he met her, he said, he was "expecting a beachball and met this giant flame-haired goddess who is slightly too tall for my comfort. Standing next to her when she has heels on, you feel like the sidecar of a motorbike".

Moffat dismissed some press criticism, early in this year's series, that Amy Pond was "too sexy".

"That's like being too funny, too nice, too enjoyable," said Moffat. "I was roaring with laughter at the article in the Daily Mail, which said when did Doctor Who assistants have to be sexy. Since the beginning! There was one in a leather bikini — we're in the nursery compared to that."

Moffat said the show's budget had remained broadly similar despite BBC cuts. But he admitted: "I don't understand numbers. It's a decent budget. I beg for money and more rubber green people and eventually they say OK, you can have a third rubber green person."

He added that he had not considered a female Doctor, which he said would not have been appropriate at this time in the show's history.

"No we didn't. I think about it sometimes and maybe it will happen someday. It wouldn't have been right this time," he said. "A woman can play the part. You have to remember the single most important thing about regeneration is you must convince the audience and the children that's it's not a new man, it's not a different man, it's the same one. It's a bigger ask if you turn him into a woman."

Discussing his future, Moffat said he would not be leaving the show "for a while yet".

Gillan, in the same TV festival sessions, said she was committed to the show for the new series.

She added that filming on the show, which lasts 11 days a fortnight for nine months, meant she was unable to work on any other projects. As for her future, she said she was committed to the new series but was taking it one season at a time.

"I have no idea. You just have to take it series by series, you can't really look beyond that so who knows? I'm having fun right now," she added.

Personally, I quite like the idea. Not sure how splitting it into two mini-series will come across from a merch POV with the audience (they best not charge the same price that a full 13 eps would get on the inidividual DVD releases!).

However, I think it'll be great not waiting as long for episodes.

Personally, I think it's gonna be a River heel turn that is the twist - we'll have to wait and see.

[Vamp]

I'm wary about the split in a way. On a personal level I don't really want many more event episodes, they're good, but in small doses, that's why they feel like such events. More of them will just make them feel more common. Plus the smaller episodes are often just as, if not more, entertaining. I'm also wary that it'll make the series seem less special. People spend ages waiting for the next Dr. Who series and the excitement builds as it gets neaerer, if its on all through the year there's not so much anticipation. That and I don't know if it'll start to feel like over exposure, I know there's not more episodes, but if they're more spaced out it might feel like its rarely off the TV. That last points a little hard to explain but yeah.

Having said that I'm sure it'll be fine. The show's storng enough to try it for a series and see what happens. They're just my early concerns. It also means we might get more Doctor Who on darker evenings, which much like Sherlock, seems to me to be the ideal time.

[9 to 5]

By sounds of that, The Doctor is going heel and River/Amy will be the ones to set him right I reckon.

[LittleDaniel]

I figured I'd bring back this topic rather than start a new one. My little brother and sister are quite into the newer Doctor Who, so for Christmas I'd like to get them some of the older Doctor. Problem is, I have no idea what to get them as I've never watched the show. There's a lot of storylines that I'm seeing collections for, like "War Games," "Battlefield," "Invisible Enemy," etc etc. So...what's a good older Doctor storyline to get them?

(I'll probably be doing my shopping on half.com, in case you want to see what else they have)

[Timmoru Suzuki]

If you're new to 'Classic' Who, beware the cheap effects and the pacing which is slower than New Who 99% of the time.

The Classics:

The Talons of Weng Chiang (Tom Baker) Possibly the best thing ever. Doctor Who or otherwise. A mix-mash of Sherlock Holmes and 'Fu Manchu' with good villians even better 'helpers' (Jago & Litefoot FTW), and a zingy script. I usually find with 'Classic' Who that as story is usually an episode or two too long. Maybe it's a perfect fit for 3 episodes, but it forced to be 4 for easier production blocks. My only gripe with this is that it isn't 60 episodes. Or 100. Essential Classic Who.

The Caves of Androzaani (Peter Davidson) Written by the same guy as above and with a plot so complex I can't begin to descirbe it. It involves two warring factions (and army and a rebel faction), gun-runners supplying arms to both, and a politician who is on anyone's side so long as it helps him. Oh, and a Monster that is running around eating anything in sight (possibly the fakestlooking costume ever though) and the small fact that the Dr and assisstant have been poisoned and need to find an antidote. Peter Davidson brings the acting.

The City of Death (Tom Baker) Paris, a mad scientist, a monster who looks like spaghetti and a John Cleese cameo. Bloody well paced too, it goings aginst my rule of Classic Who being too dragged out.

Genesis of the Daleks (Tom Baker) was once voted the best Dr. Who story ever. It possibly is the best story, but sadly falls into the trap of being a bit dragged out. It's 6 episodes, should be four, nothing happens in the middle. However, when it's on, it's ON, you meet Davros for the first time and he is brilliant (as are the Daleks) and it's an overall 'important' Who story. Oh, and the end is great.

Spearhead from Space (John Pertwee) Okay, so I love the Autons. The classic Autons, not the plastic jobbers from 'Rose.' This is just fun and again isn't dragged out.

I think I maybe I'm forgetting one more to add to that which I own on DVD, but my collection is boxed up and I can't be arsed to unpack it all to check.

I've also seen and enjoyed and which you might consider if you like the above:

Horror of Fang Rock (an alien vs. a Lighthouse)

The Robots of Death (Robots. Death. On a spaceship)

Black Orchid (1920's British country house, murder mystery. All totally silly and quite short)

Robot (A Robot is given orders which conflict with it's programming and goes mental. It's really good for the first 3 1/2 episodes and the last ten mins of the 4th. Ingnore the bumf inbetween)

The Deadly Assassin (It's good, save for the one episode which is twenty-five minutes of Tom Baker running around a quarry for no particular reason at all. Someone tries to assassinate someone important, The Doctor tries to stop them; which, for some reason involves 'entering his own mind' and running around a quarry for twenty-five minutes)

And I've seen more but those are the main ones I can think of.

[MGW]

Caves of Abdrozani is outstaning, as is Tallons of Weng Chiang. I'd also recommend Curse of Fenric. It's a Seventh Doctor story and one of the last stories of the old series, but it's really well done, has a good story and shows a different, plotting version of the Doctor which works well with Silvester McCoy.

[Vamp]

The Deadly Assassin (It's good, save for the one episode which is twenty-five minutes of Tom Baker running around a quarry for no particular reason at all. Someone tries to assassinate someone important, The Doctor tries to stop them; which, for some reason involves 'entering his own mind' and running around a quarry for twenty-five minutes)

Does that running around the quarry bit involve something to do with a clown? I have a kinda vague recollection of it in the back of my mind but can't make up my mind if it was this story, a different one or a dream...

[MGW]

So Christmas Doctor Who was a bit good, not as showy as previous years, but much better for being a bit understated and character driven. And who can argue with Space Sharks....

[DFF]

So Christmas Doctor Who was a bit good, not as showy as previous years, but much better for being a bit understated and character driven. And who can argue with Space Sharks....

Yup, I enjoyed it. One of the better Christmas specials, in my opinion. Also, how about that for a humdinger of a trailer for the new series!?

Doctor Who vs. Nazis is an obvious winner, as the episode where he seems to be channelling the spirit of Indiana Jones. Plus, The Ood are never a disappointment, and that creepy looking thing at the very end looks cool too.

[GhostMachine]

We get the Christmas episode here in the U.S. on BBC America tonight. Its airing at 9PM EST, which is just over an hour and a half away. Then they're running it again at midnight, I believe. I'll probably end up watching the re-run.