which actor did a better job of playing the 1st doctor,richard hurndall or william hartnell?.
Hurndall or Hartnell
- Thread starter Mr Pointy Ears
- Start date
When did they cut that Hurndall was supposed to be a robot?
Was Hurndall playing that he was a Robot?
Was Hurndall playing that he was a Robot?
Last edited:
I gotta go with Hartnell. Hurndall was good, but I think his performance concentrated more on the First Doctor being a cranky elder statesman while Hartnell showed the First Doctor was also sly and slightly looney at times too, IMO...
I definitely prefer Richard Hurndall.
Hartnell. Hurndall was pretty dreadful and completely jarring whenever I watch it (which is almost never).
Hartnell, obviously. He was the First Doctor, and Hurndall was just impersonating. Don't get me wrong, Hurndall did a decent job under the circumstances, but impersonating Hartnell was basically all he was doing.
I remember back in the day, I read comments from people saying that Hurndall bore an uncanny resemblance to Hartnell, but I never saw it. He was an adequate approximation, but hardly uncanny.
Hartnell at his peak was far better. I mean, come on, he was the one who defined the Doctor, who established him as a mercurial, eccentric figure who was capable of a wide range of moods and behaviors from arrogance to whimsy to childish pettiness to impassioned heroism, but who was always the smartest and most self-assured person in the room even if not always the wisest.
Hartnell at his peak was far better. I mean, come on, he was the one who defined the Doctor, who established him as a mercurial, eccentric figure who was capable of a wide range of moods and behaviors from arrogance to whimsy to childish pettiness to impassioned heroism, but who was always the smartest and most self-assured person in the room even if not always the wisest.
Both actor's did a really good job but Hartnell is the First doc.
But i was watching a old stepto and son the other night and Hurndall appeared in it as this camp dealer who had his sights on Harold....and he was dressed very much in Pertwees Dr who style, frilly shirt sleeve, the cape thing over the fancy jacket, very much the dandy.......a small of glimpse of what could have been i thought.
But i was watching a old stepto and son the other night and Hurndall appeared in it as this camp dealer who had his sights on Harold....and he was dressed very much in Pertwees Dr who style, frilly shirt sleeve, the cape thing over the fancy jacket, very much the dandy.......a small of glimpse of what could have been i thought.
This about sums it up for me. I don't see how anyone can even make a comparison.
Really? You're asking us to compare an actor who played the role for four years and basically defined the character of the Doctor, to an actor who played the role for one episode and was basically just trying to copy the first actor? That's like asking if Val Kilmer made a better Jim Morrison than Jim Morrison himself did
Peter Cushing.
This...
Really? You're asking us to compare an actor who played the role for four years and basically defined the character of the Doctor, to an actor who played the role for one episode and was basically just trying to copy the first actor? That's like asking if Val Kilmer made a better Jim Morrison than Jim Morrison himself did
...and this.
Is this a serious question?
I haven't seen The Five Doctors in years, but going from memory I think Hurndall would have made a very competent First Doctor had a prequel with him in it been proposed and filmed. No doubt Hartnell's redundancies and fourth-wall-breaking would have been left out, though those were largely due to the pace of filming (and presumably Hartnell's illness). "Elder statesman" is probably a good description.
Hartnell was more well-rounded, though; going from cynical, fearful and felonious to a somewhat upbeat, kindly, doddery and humanistic character without the latter aspects being too inconsistent with the former. Gets my vote, not that the comparison between the two isn't meaningful.
Hartnell was more well-rounded, though; going from cynical, fearful and felonious to a somewhat upbeat, kindly, doddery and humanistic character without the latter aspects being too inconsistent with the former. Gets my vote, not that the comparison between the two isn't meaningful.
Double post, sorry.
Hartnell wasn't always like that, though. It was mainly in the later part of his run as he grew ill. His work in earlier serials (like "The Crusade," which I just saw/heard as part of the Lost in Time DVD collection not long ago) was much more solid, with very few stumbles.
Hurndall was my first exposure to the first Doctor, so perhaps because of that I'm more forgiving of his performance than others. After watching or listening to a great deal of Hartnell's era, I still think Hurndall was fine as the first Doctor and for the 90-odd minutes of "The Five Doctors," I can believe that Hurndall and Hartnell are portraying the same person.
(I'm actually more forgiving of Hurndall in "The Five Doctors" than I am of Pertwee in the same episode. Hurndall was at least made up to resemble Hartnell, circa 1966, while Pertwee is an older, daffier version of himself. Could they not have slapped a wig on Pertwee or bought him some Just For Men to put some of the color in his hair?)
Geoffrey Balydon's first Doctor in the Doctor Who Unbound audio plays is also quite good.
I can't really choose between the three actors, nor would I want to, because, for me, they're all portraying the same person.
If an earlier Doctor were recast, I don't know that I'd be bothered by it, since I've no trouble to different actors portraying Sherlock Holmes or James Bond or Dracula and bringing different nuances to the role. What makes Doctor Who (or Star Trek, which dealt with this a few years ago) different is that its characters originated not in prose but on film and are thus more tied to a performance, but I think some actors would find that more of a challenge than a hinderance as they found a way to make a defined character their own.
(I'm actually more forgiving of Hurndall in "The Five Doctors" than I am of Pertwee in the same episode. Hurndall was at least made up to resemble Hartnell, circa 1966, while Pertwee is an older, daffier version of himself. Could they not have slapped a wig on Pertwee or bought him some Just For Men to put some of the color in his hair?)
Geoffrey Balydon's first Doctor in the Doctor Who Unbound audio plays is also quite good.
I can't really choose between the three actors, nor would I want to, because, for me, they're all portraying the same person.
If an earlier Doctor were recast, I don't know that I'd be bothered by it, since I've no trouble to different actors portraying Sherlock Holmes or James Bond or Dracula and bringing different nuances to the role. What makes Doctor Who (or Star Trek, which dealt with this a few years ago) different is that its characters originated not in prose but on film and are thus more tied to a performance, but I think some actors would find that more of a challenge than a hinderance as they found a way to make a defined character their own.
There can be only one One.
Hartnell.
Hartnell.
