| |
 |
|
October 5 2008, 10:38 PM
|
#1
|
|
Rear Admiral
|
Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
Rumor has it that Patrick Stewart may be headed to another science-fiction franchise next year. As reported by the Daily Star, Stewart may join Doctor Who next year, and could become a regular character on the popular science-fiction series. According to the article, Stewart has been offered the role of a rival Time Lord, called "The Meddling Monk." The Meddling Monk was last seen on Doctor Who in the second and third seasons of Doctor Who in the 1960s, in the The Time Meddler and The Daleks' Master Plan episodes. The Meddling Monk was played originally by Peter Butterworth. Stewart, a big fan of Doctor Who, would like to take the part if his schedule will permit it. According to the Daily Star, the BBC is so eager to have Stewart, that they will save his character for 2010 if necessary. Sources claim that "Patrick has been formally approached to star in Doctor Who and is very keen to do it." Stewart has expressed his desire to be in Doctor Who before, as reported by TrekMovie.com. "I would love to be in Doctor Who," said Stewart at the time. "I am doing some R.S.C. work with David Tennant next year so who knows? If we gel on stage we could on screen." Only time will tell if The Meddling Monk will return to Doctor Who. To read more, head to the article located here.
|
|
|
October 5 2008, 11:25 PM
|
#2
|
|
The Doctor
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
Here's hoping it's true. Patrick Stewart on Doctor Who would be fantastic. I'm not quite sure if I would have him as The Meddling Monk (although I do like the character), but I'll take whatever I can get.
__________________
"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually, from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly...timey-wimey...stuff."
"This is my timey-wimey detector. Goes ding when there's stuff."
|
|
|
October 5 2008, 11:41 PM
|
#3
|
|
Admiral
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
That would be awesome. I hope it happens.
|
|
|
October 5 2008, 11:45 PM
|
#4
|
|
Vice Admiral
Location: In a country with UHC
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
Emh wrote:

Here's hoping it's true. Patrick Stewart on Doctor Who would be fantastic. I'm not quite sure if I would have him as The Meddling Monk (although I do like the character), but I'll take whatever I can get. 
|
Silly, John Simm is returning as the Meddling Monk in the specials!
|
|
|
October 6 2008, 12:20 AM
|
#5
|
|
Lieutenant Commander
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
I believe that if this occurred, I would have learned the meaning of the word awesome.
|
|
|
October 6 2008, 03:52 AM
|
#6
|
|
Commodore
Location: Danoz in Washington, D.C.
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
If this happens I'm dropping everything and starting Dr. Who... a series I have yet to see!
|
|
|
October 6 2008, 03:53 AM
|
#7
|
|
Rear Admiral
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
Great. Then Stewart can add Doctor Who to his reasons for bemoaning the agony of being kept away from his beloved Shakespeare.
__________________
The reason we have two ears and only one mouth, is that we may hear more and speak less.
- Zeno of Cittium (334-262 BC)
|
|
|
October 6 2008, 02:50 PM
|
#8
|
|
Lieutenant Commander
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
This is the second time Patrick Stewart has been considered for a role-he was almost a time lord in the 1983 story "Arc of Infinity".
|
|
|
October 6 2008, 03:14 PM
|
#9
|
|
Writer
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
Don't get your hopes up - the DW team and PS would love to work with each other but nothing's set, and the Star and the Sun are both merely quoting from the spoiler/speculation forum on Outpost Gallifrey...
(And AIUI, if he does appear, it'd be in the last special, not the opening story of season 5, which may or may not contain Daleks.)
|
|
|
October 6 2008, 06:47 PM
|
#10
|
|
Disrespectful of his betters
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
zenophite wrote:

Great. Then Stewart can add Doctor Who to his reasons for bemoaning the agony of being kept away from his beloved Shakespeare.
|
Not necessarily ... The Doctor and the Monk are both Time Lords. The Doctor has met Shakespeare previously, and we know he's going to do so again. I could pretty easily see the Monk getting caught up with Billy there.
|
|
|
October 6 2008, 07:22 PM
|
#11
|
|
Vice Admiral
Location: Someplace rather dry at the moment
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
Stewart would make a brilliant next incarnation of The Doctor (an older actor wouldn't hurt). Either way, this will be interesting.
__________________
Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.
|
|
|
October 6 2008, 08:19 PM
|
#12
|
|
Administrator
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
The Daily Star *shakes his head in despair for his country*
|
|
|
October 7 2008, 12:55 AM
|
#13
|
|
Vice Admiral
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
That would be cool beyond belief. I'm not familiar with the character of the Meddling Monk, but just the notion of seeing Patrick on nuWho...
__________________
"There's nothing that's lost that can't be found again." - Lex Luthor
|
|
|
October 7 2008, 05:37 AM
|
#14
|
|
moderator
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
I've heard of the Meddling Monk, but don't know much about him (personality-wise). Still, Stewart would be really cool in a Doctor Who episode. Hell, it's almost a Why not. If he's a fan and can fit it around his Shakespearian schedule, it's worth it.
__________________
When on Romulus, Do as the Romulans
|
|
|
October 7 2008, 07:27 AM
|
#15
|
|
Rear Admiral
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
I'd be happy to never see Stewart again but then again I don't have much emotional investment in Dr Who anyway so ultimately I don't care one way or another.
__________________
The reason we have two ears and only one mouth, is that we may hear more and speak less.
- Zeno of Cittium (334-262 BC)
|
|
|
October 7 2008, 07:55 AM
|
#16
|
|
Vice Admiral
Location: In a country with UHC
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
zenophite wrote:

I'd be happy to never see Stewart again but then again I don't have much emotional investment in Dr Who anyway so ultimately I don't care one way or another.
|
Thanks for your input.
|
|
|
October 7 2008, 03:02 PM
|
#17
|
|
Vice Admiral
Location: Someplace rather dry at the moment
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
Alidar Warlock wrote:

I've heard of the Meddling Monk, but don't know much about him (personality-wise). Still, Stewart would be really cool in a Doctor Who episode. Hell, it's almost a Why not. If he's a fan and can fit it around his Shakespearian schedule, it's worth it.
|
I'm not well versed in Old Who, but here's what Wikipedia had to say about The Meddling Monk.
Sounds like an interesting character that Stewart could pull off quite well.
__________________
Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.
|
|
|
October 7 2008, 04:20 PM
|
#18
|
|
Lieutenant Commander
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
The Time Meddler was recently released on DVD, and the DVD releases lately have been tying in with the the TV series....
The Time Meddler was the first Doctor Who serial to feature another TARDIS, and the first true appearence of a time lord outside of the Doctor and (presumabely) Susan.
However, the Monk was mainly potrayed as a comic relief character-more sinister time lord villain didn't arrive until the Troughton and Pertwee eras.
|
|
|
October 7 2008, 09:34 PM
|
#19
|
|
Captain
Location: The European Union
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage ! Allons-y ! Engage !
__________________
Yorick: "Are they terrorists?"
Mum: "No worse...they're Republicans"
(From Vertigo's Y:The Last Man)
|
|
|
October 8 2008, 12:17 AM
|
#20
|
|
Fleet Captain
|
Re: Stewart 'Doctor Who' Role?
Dismembered Picard wrote:

Alidar Warlock wrote:

I've heard of the Meddling Monk, but don't know much about him (personality-wise). Still, Stewart would be really cool in a Doctor Who episode. Hell, it's almost a Why not. If he's a fan and can fit it around his Shakespearian schedule, it's worth it.
|
I'm not well versed in Old Who, but here's what Wikipedia had to say about The Meddling Monk.
Sounds like an interesting character that Stewart could pull off quite well.
|
Patrick Stewart would be very different to Peter Butterworth's Monk, but I could see the idea of playing a, well, playful villain appealing to him, and a different but similar portrayal is exactly what makes the changes of Doctor work (in some ways, Butterworth's Monk and John De Lancie's Q have similarities in their childish, playful, style).
Still, it's all just rumour at best. And the major problem I can see is that, even on the Monk's second appearance, there was no good reason for him still to be posing as a Monk, except to remind the viewers of who he was. 45 years on, there'd be even less. But if you drop that, how do you let the long-memory fans know who he is? (Obvious answer is call him Mortimus, but that's a name from the Who books, so it's only known to maybe 10,00 people who maybe remember a book from 15 years back).
He is a character it'd be nice to see again though, so long as it works.
__________________
"Some days are better than others. They say that where I come from."
"Loudly, I imagine, on the day you left."
(Blake's 7 - Rumours of Death)
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
| |
|