50th Anniversary, the 11 Doctors?

[Stevil2001]

I don't see the point of recasting. Patrick Troughton was never playing a character called "the Second Doctor" or "Two". He was playing the Doctor. I don't have a fondness for "the Second Doctor," I enjoy Patrick Troughton's portrayal of the Doctor. Getting someone else to impersonate Patrick Troughton is pointless because it won't be the performance I remember, which is what I enjoy.

 

[Whofan]

David Troughton, like Sean Pertwee, does bear a uncanny resemblance to his father (More so in his older age-in "Midnight), and was apparentally considered to be a character model for the Eighth Doctor had the TV movie not been made and the New Adventures book series continued.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

Yes, but as I mentioned earlier in the thread, both sons have flat out refused to portray their respective fathers' characters.

 

[Bacl]

maybe they can find a way to do a flashback of 8 regenerating into 9.

Would love to see this.

I especially like the idea that 9 was born OF the Time War. If the Doctor's personality is sometimes subtly influenced by his death and the surroundings of his regeneration, then imagine dying in the final act of the Time War, and being reborn as...well, as 9, I'd suppose.

It's funny how 9 is always thought of as dark and angry. I've rewatched those episodes. He's very, very sad and damaged and almost unable to go on. Rose showed him life was worth living, that there could be joy...and the influenced and helped give birth to 10...who in many ways imprinted on the spirit of Rose (or what The Doctor viewed as the spirit of Rose).

There was once a really cool idea going around in regards to the nature of 5's death and how it gave rise to 6. 5 died frightened and, in a way, without reason (sacrificing himself for a near stranger) and that this grizzly death shattered him and creating a much darker almost schizophrenic Doctor who harbored a deep resentment of Peri and didn't see things clearly when he looked at himself in the mirror.

 

[Australis]

I don't see the point of recasting. Patrick Troughton was never playing a character called "the Second Doctor" or "Two". He was playing the Doctor.

He was playing a version of the Doctor - you can't tell me the Troughton Doctor is the same character as the Tennant Doctor.

Ever seen a movie or TV series where different actors play the same character? (Not Bond, that's different) Where we're seeing the actors at different ages? Indiana Jones comes to mind - Harrison Ford and River Phoenix.

Hell, even in the real world, people regenerate into someone else. The boy at 17 isn't the same as the man at 30 isn't the same as the man at 55. They're kind of the same but different (I personally am vety, very glad I'm not who I was at 17. Or 24. Or 30). We're just a bit more subtle about it, but not as long lived.

 

[Stevil2001]

I don't see the point of recasting. Patrick Troughton was never playing a character called "the Second Doctor" or "Two". He was playing the Doctor.

He was playing a version of the Doctor - you can't tell me the Troughton Doctor is the same character as the Tennant Doctor.

Of course not. He was playing Troughton's version, not Tennant's version. But getting in (say) David Troughton wouldn't give you Patrick Troughton's version, it'd give you David Troughton's.

Ever seen a movie or TV series where different actors play the same character? (Not Bond, that's different) Where we're seeing the actors at different ages? Indiana Jones comes to mind - Harrison Ford and River Phoenix.

Right, and each actor interprets the part differently. But you wouldn't hire someone to play Harrison Ford's "incarnation" of Indiana Jones-- that'd be silly.

Hell, even in the real world, people regenerate into someone else. The boy at 17 isn't the same as the man at 30 isn't the same as the man at 55. They're kind of the same but different (I personally am vety, very glad I'm not who I was at 17. Or 24. Or 30). We're just a bit more subtle about it, but not as long lived.

Yep, and this is why I wouldn't mind seeing a "young" first Doctor-- because the actor wouldn't (hopefully) be trying to do a William Hartnell, but would be playing a genuinely different incarnation of the character.

 

[The Doctor]

I think that multiple Doctors is fun in short bursts ("Time Crash") but I'm not convinced that it works so well in long-format. In any case, there's no way that Ecclestone will ever return to Who and Tennant would only overshadow Smith this close to the re-casting, so I doubt very highly we'll see a multi-Doctor show anytime soon.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

I think that multiple Doctors is fun in short bursts ("Time Crash") but I'm not convinced that it works so well in long-format. In any case, there's no way that Ecclestone will ever return to Who and Tennant would only overshadow Smith this close to the re-casting, so I doubt very highly we'll see a multi-Doctor show anytime soon.

It's still 2 years. So (hopefully) Smith is still there, which would give him 3 years as the Doctor.

Or, we have a new guy, in his first series, which goes back to your point about being overshadowed.

 

[Starkers]

Of course not. He was playing Troughton's version, not Tennant's version. But getting in (say) David Troughton wouldn't give you Patrick Troughton's version, it'd give you David Troughton's.

This is what I thought when that daft rumour circulated a few years back that Tennant was taking over for a year whilst Tennant took a break (with the Doctor and the Master switching minds) I hated the idea, not because I didn't think Simm could do a good Doctor (he wouldn't be anywhere near my top choice but he'd be good) but because he wouldn't be his Doctor, he'd just be doing an impersonation of Tennant.

 

[Captaindemotion]

I think that multiple Doctors is fun in short bursts ("Time Crash") but I'm not convinced that it works so well in long-format. In any case, there's no way that Ecclestone will ever return to Who and Tennant would only overshadow Smith this close to the re-casting, so I doubt very highly we'll see a multi-Doctor show anytime soon.

Much as I love Tennant's Doctor, I don't think he'd overshadow Smith. Smith has owned that role from the second he appeared onscreen. It'd be nice to see DT back in a crossover but there'd be no worries of him dominating the screen the way everyone thought Tom Baker might have in The Five Doctors.

 

[Starkers]

Yeah, Tennant would seem to be painfully trying to hard next to the more natural Smith. Then again he can dial it down...it might depend on the Director...

 

[captcalhoun]

and the script.

 

[Starkers]

Yeah that too!

 

[Allyn Gibson]

By 2013, I don't think a Tennant return appearance on Doctor Who will overshadow Matt Smith. By that time, Smith will be into his fourth year in the role, and the only way Tennant could really overshadow Smith would be if Smith had taken to sleepwalking through the role. I don't find that likely.

A Tennant return would be interesting, for the same reason that Lawrence Miles and Tat Wood in About Time Volume 3 remark upon Troughton's return in "The Three Doctors" -- being a (or the) junior Doctor in a multi-Doctor story would be something new for Tennant's interpretation of the role, and something that he couldn't do doing his era. (Though I will admit that the first half of "The Next Doctor" comes close.)

I don't know what I want to see for the anniversary. Someone was talking with me about this in the breakroom at work yesterday. "Colin Baker in a girdle and a wig!" he said. I'm sure a story could be written that brings back everyone from Davison forward, but I don't know that I really want that. Suspension of disbelief can only take us so far, and perhaps that would be a story better suited for a year-long story arc in Doctor Who Magazine or a beefy hardcover novel from BBC Books.

I almost think I'd rather see something smaller scale. The incumbent Doctor (I'm presuming Smith, based on reports from yesterday's press screening) and a pre-"Unearthly Child" Doctor might be more effective. Perhaps something that ties into the reason the Doctor fled Gallifrey in the first place, it now has resonance in the Doctor's present, and to resolve the issue the current Doctor must go back to where it all began for him.

Alternatively, if the 9/10 console room is still standing (and assuming they have no plans to tear it down), I might commission two standalone specials, one with Eccleston, one with Tennant. Missing adventure kind of things, for the 50th anniversary.

And if Nick Briggs is listening, I'd love an audio dramatization of The Infinity Doctors, with Paul McGann as the Doctor, for the 50th anniversary.

 

[Mr Awe]

I think that multiple Doctors is fun in short bursts ("Time Crash") but I'm not convinced that it works so well in long-format. In any case, there's no way that Ecclestone will ever return to Who and Tennant would only overshadow Smith this close to the re-casting, so I doubt very highly we'll see a multi-Doctor show anytime soon.

This overshadowing fear is something that the fans like to worry about so they can think they know something about show business. In reality, there are many examples of shows, plays, stories, etc having multiple strong characters. This can work very nicely. In fact, they can make each other work well interactively. Like a strong villian can make a strong hero look even better.

You can have a strong ensemble cast that works well together. There's tons of examples. The only thing different with Who is that instead of an ensemble of different characters, it's an ensemble of one character who is portrayed differently. Virtually the same thing in practice.

It's all how it's written, directed, etc. This is what they're paid to do.

I don't think Tennant will be appearing this year but even if he were, there's no need to worry about the "overshadowing" thing.

Mr Awe

 

[Tom]

What would excite me is to have Mcgann in as the 8th doctor and posibbly have a younger version of the first doctor.

 

[Sindatur]

Yea, I'd like to see McGann again. he was pretty decent in the TV Movie, and I've listened to several of his Audio Dramas, so, he'd be much more comfortable in the role now. Plus it would be so great to see something about what the Dr. did to end the Time War and/or see McGann change into Eccelstone

 

[I Grok Spock]

I've rolled around the various ideas, and I think the young 1st Doctor would be the way to go. Maybe work in William Russell (SJA notwithstanding) and Totter's Lane to kick off the story.

I'd also be partial to one or more independent Eighth Doctor/Time War stories, but I understand that a) the BBC will not want to dilute their brand with two versions of the Doctor, and b) this is a maximally fan-wankish idea.

 

[The Doctor]

I think that multiple Doctors is fun in short bursts ("Time Crash") but I'm not convinced that it works so well in long-format. In any case, there's no way that Ecclestone will ever return to Who and Tennant would only overshadow Smith this close to the re-casting, so I doubt very highly we'll see a multi-Doctor show anytime soon.

This overshadowing fear is something that the fans like to worry about so they can think they know something about show business. In reality, there are many examples of shows, plays, stories, etc having multiple strong characters. This can work very nicely. In fact, they can make each other work well interactively. Like a strong villian can make a strong hero look even better.

Good thing you're here to set the wayward fans straight.

Could it be that perhaps, just perhaps, I think that Tennant will overshadow Smith because Tennant's the better Doctor? That he's the most beloved actor to take on the role since Tom Baker? Maybe, just maybe, I'm not an ignorant fool who has no concept of show business beyond what you deign to share with me from your voluminous experience?

Jesus Tapdancing Christ, tone the pedantics down a notch, eh? I'll happily stipulate that your e-penis is huge, provided you spare me the condescension.

Deal?

 

[Mr Awe]

I think that multiple Doctors is fun in short bursts ("Time Crash") but I'm not convinced that it works so well in long-format. In any case, there's no way that Ecclestone will ever return to Who and Tennant would only overshadow Smith this close to the re-casting, so I doubt very highly we'll see a multi-Doctor show anytime soon.

This overshadowing fear is something that the fans like to worry about so they can think they know something about show business. In reality, there are many examples of shows, plays, stories, etc having multiple strong characters. This can work very nicely. In fact, they can make each other work well interactively. Like a strong villian can make a strong hero look even better.

Good thing you're here to set the wayward fans straight.

Could it be that perhaps, just perhaps, I think that Tennant will overshadow Smith because Tennant's the better Doctor? That he's the most beloved actor to take on the role since Tom Baker? Maybe, just maybe, I'm not an ignorant fool who has no concept of show business beyond what you deign to share with me from your voluminous experience?

Jesus Tapdancing Christ, tone the pedantics down a notch, eh? I'll happily stipulate that your e-penis is huge, provided you spare me the condescension.

Deal?

Whoah, dude, take a pill or something!

I'm just saying that ensemble casts with multiple strong characters are possible. There's nothing really Earth shattering about that!

It's just that fans like to get worked up in a knot and say, whoah, that couldn't happen or that would be a disaster!

Settle down a bit.

Mr Awe