Are we ever going to get the faded "face" back in the intro?

[Brent]

Simple really, the faded face intro is a classic icon IMO, I miss it, I wish they'd bring whatever Doctor is the current Doctor's face into the intro, fading in just like the classic series.

 

[Starkers]

I think it depends on the Doctor. 9's grim face would have been excellent, and I think Smith's would work quite well. No so sure about Tennant gurning through the titles though...

I do wonder if its something they've at least mocked up and decided against or whether they just decided against it straight away.

 

[Lindley]

While it doesn't show the faces in the "traditional" style, I do like the way this video highlights the differences between Eccleston and Tennant's themes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zz3MD-p5ExM

 

[ATimson]

I'm glad that both RTD and Moffat have realized that the face wasn't iconic.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I'm glad that both RTD and Moffat have realized that the face wasn't iconic.

God, yes. Tacky, cheap and completely out-of-place in a contemporary version of Who.

I suppose, though, for a lot of people this is an issue like the "Space...the final frontier" intro to TOS Trek...they consider it "iconic" and aren't completely happy unless it's there (and then critical if it's not done just so).

 

[Starkers]

Like many things in the classic series, when done right it was awesome, when done badly it was terrible! The McCoy sequence is a great example. He looks really quite frightening. Then he winks! Arghhhh!!

 

[Bacl]

I think this example of Tennant's face over the old opening credits worked well. Given how insanely popular Tennant was, I think having his giant face flying around on the credits would have just made his fanatics squeal louder (confession: I would have squealed the loudest. Bam!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zfmQQSfOrQ

 

[Cutter John]

I always rather enjoyed the faces. But then I'm pretty old-school anyway.

 

[23skidoo]

God, yes. Tacky, cheap and completely out-of-place in a contemporary version of Who.

I usually bristle at the notion of things being considered tacky simply because they are old, but in this case I have to agree. I love the old show to bits, and I love (most) of the openings, but if they tried that today they'd be laughed out of the room. Watching some of the fan-made openings on YouTube, you can see how it just doesn't work. (There's a particularly infamous one where they take Eccleston's face and try to do a Davison-style effect to it and it looks like crap begins shooting out his ears!)

It could be argued that the face really didn't fit in after JNT introduced the starfield opening with the last Tom Baker season. The picture they used for Tom was garbage, and it looked bad. Davison's image wasn't much better. Colin Baker had a bit of sparkle to it, but the "animated" smile was a bit grating. And why someone decided McCoy would look good covered in bronze bodypaint escapes me. Considering there's plenty of precedent for people switching channels based on disliking the opening alone (exhibit A being Star Trek Enterprise, but I've even heard this stated regarding dislike over the new Doctor Who theme arrangement), I can only wonder how many people - modern viewers - tuned in, saw bodypaint-covered McCoy grinning at them, and went "FAIL" and switched over to a Buffy rerun?

I've also seen fan-made attempts at using the "closeup and actor name" opening credits format used by many other shows (I've seen it attempted using templates from Buffy, Smallville, CSI and other shows - with and without the DW Theme) and while interesting, it just doesn't work, either

The current format is classy and modern and I don't want to see them go back to what they were doing before.

Alex

 

[davejames]

The old-style titles definitely had a charm to them, but I think their time has gone. Just like the omniscient voiceover guy from shows like Lost in Space and Superfriends who used to always explain everything to the viewer.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The only one that wasn't bad, at least in concept, was the Tom Baker "starfield" version. The others looked like cheap advertisements for something or other.

 

[The]

I don't know...I thought the original Tom Baker opening was very haunting, but only because he has such a severe look. If he looked happy, it would have been very gay. Which is what JNT (RTD?) would have wanted...

 

[FalTorPan]

I'm glad that both RTD and Moffat have realized that the face wasn't iconic.

God, yes. Tacky, cheap and completely out-of-place in a contemporary version of Who.

I suppose, though, for a lot of people this is an issue like the "Space...the final frontier" intro to TOS Trek...they consider it "iconic" and aren't completely happy unless it's there (and then critical if it's not done just so).

I don't consider the Doctor's face thing to be iconic, since one of my favorite eras, the Hartnell era, also didn't feature the Doctor's face in the opening sequence.

 

[diankra]

I liked the fairly low-key version on the early Tom Baker stories. Not keen on the later versions, so sooner not have it back.

 

[Kelso]

The least corny way to do it would be to just throw the Doctor's reflection on to the letters of Matt Smith's name in the credits.

But I'd rather they didn't.

 

[Captain Pike]

Look, it was fine with Troughton, Pertwee & Baker. After that JNT put his usual touch to it, and, as with almost everything else, borked it up. Sylvester covered in bronze paint and winking during the opening sequence is what a lot of folks think of when you mention bringing back the face, but it wasn't always so incredibly tasteless..

 

[Sci]

"Are we ever going to get the faded "face" back in the intro?"

God, I hope not. The entire concept is so cheesy it's painful.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

There's something very "Willie Wonka" about it.

Wonka had rather a Doctor-ish look about him, didn't he?

 

[Starkers]

Look, it was fine with Troughton, Pertwee & Baker. After that JNT put his usual touch to it, and, as with almost everything else, borked it up. Sylvester covered in bronze paint and winking during the opening sequence is what a lot of folks think of when you mention bringing back the face, but it wasn't always so incredibly tasteless..

Yeah I pretty much agree, although I thought the starfield worked better with Davison than Tom-the McCoy one is just ruined by the wink.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

I don't really see how bringing the face back (I think the Tom Baker time tunnel one was the best, myself) would be any cheesier or tackier than, say, the DW logo becoming the TARDIS and spinning away--and I like that effect.

There's something very "Willie Wonka" about it.

Wonka had rather a Doctor-ish look about him, didn't he?

I thought of that when we were talking about the new Daleks: this show under Moffat has a toy-shop aesthetic to it and that is damned close to a candy shop aesthetic. And both WW and The Doctor are British eccentrics.

You joked about Moffat "Abramsizing" Doctor Who in that thread. The Trek movie also made me think of Willie Wonka, particularly in regards to Scotty, who is pals with an Oompa-Loompa and takes a Wonka-ish ride through the waterworks. And Simon Pegg was on Doctor Who and Amy Pond is Scottish...

I suspect The Illuminati are somehow involved.