Didn't he say later, he regretted not appearing in the "The Five Doctor's"?
As for he 30th wasn't that a charity spoof? Charity can get people back into a role.
Doctor Who on the wane
- Thread starter Bob The Skutter
- Start date
Didn't he say later, he regretted not appearing in the "The Five Doctor's"?
As for he 30th wasn't that a charity spoof? Charity can get people back into a role.
it was charity, but not a spoof. just crap.
I hate how people consistently attack DiT. It was for charity and had a low budget people! It was never meant to be a proper anniversary special. It was not crap, just a bit of silly uncanonised fun.
It never was as good post-Rose, and Tennant is very definitely missed. I liked the Master, though.
Thanks Legion.
Maybe I am just a bit biased but the Doctor was happier when travelling alongside Rose and you just knew they would come away from any random adventure just fine.
After Rose left, the ante went up, the stakes got higher, and things were never the same again.
Simm just isn't Master material. He is a fine actor but the Master requires...sophistication and charm. Not looking like a schoolboy who is high on his first real date.
Reminds me in a way of Turlough but Turlough at least could evoke sinister qualities as well as charm.
I really do doubt Chris will return. You can't really compare it to Tom Baker's tenure in the series because Tom gave it 7 years of his life and finally left after being tired of it. Chris on the other hand seemed to have approached it with some reservation from the beginning but was just interested enough in it to accept the role (possibly because he had previously worked with RTD which gave him enough faith in it). Keep in mind, for the regeneration plot to be scripted and filmed the way it was, he must have made his decision by the time it came to film the 6th or 7th ep of 2005.
The point is, despite his brilliance in the role, deep down, I get the impression he just felt it was never for him but was happy enough with the year he did take the role and not look back after that. Whereas Tom Baker loved the role until it got to a certain point, felt bitter about it but later rekindled his love for the series. Eccleston's enthusiasm for it seemed muted from the beginning. I even remember him saying he was never a fan of the series when it was on air.
It's a shame because he was so good at it. Again, my favourite of the latest three.
interesting article here (but an oldie):
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/tvandradioblog/2011/jul/21/doctor-who-christopher-eccleston
The point is, despite his brilliance in the role, deep down, I get the impression he just felt it was never for him but was happy enough with the year he did take the role and not look back after that. Whereas Tom Baker loved the role until it got to a certain point, felt bitter about it but later rekindled his love for the series. Eccleston's enthusiasm for it seemed muted from the beginning. I even remember him saying he was never a fan of the series when it was on air.
It's a shame because he was so good at it. Again, my favourite of the latest three.
interesting article here (but an oldie):
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/tvandradioblog/2011/jul/21/doctor-who-christopher-eccleston
Oh Chris
^ Yep. Like I said...he doesn't seem to like to reprise roles at all.
I doubt it's ever a complete no even if he's said so. But I'll agree it's not likely. The next question would they bring back some of the older doctors for a multi-doctor story? And would they just explain away any aging the same way they did Time Crash? At least that's better than what they've done for past multi doctor stories. I think Sylvester McCoy and Paul McGann could still be passable although both obviously older than their last on screen appearances. It's not as obvious as it would be for Baker, Davison, and Baker.
As much as i like tight plots in terms of their logic and consistency of fictional law/lore, one thing i'm happy for the producers not to explain is the relatively aged appearance of the Doctors. When Peter Davison made his appearance in Time Crash, I didn't care that he didn't look same as he did back between 1981-1984. I took it for what it was, two Doctor's on the same set. Some things you just need to waive.
For all we know, the Doctor just looks aged because he was taken out of what should have been the set timeline to which not even the time bubble can shield him from. Basically, as long as their appearance isn't ridiculously too far from when they last played the role (Tom Baker), then an on screen appearance without fictionalising their wrinkles in the script is welcome. With a touch of makeup, Davison, McCoy and McGann would all make fantastic contributions. As actors, i'm sure they're the best they've ever been despite the passage of aging.
For all we know, the Doctor just looks aged because he was taken out of what should have been the set timeline to which not even the time bubble can shield him from. Basically, as long as their appearance isn't ridiculously too far from when they last played the role (Tom Baker), then an on screen appearance without fictionalising their wrinkles in the script is welcome. With a touch of makeup, Davison, McCoy and McGann would all make fantastic contributions. As actors, i'm sure they're the best they've ever been despite the passage of aging.
Here is something to consider: if only certain Doctor actors are asked back for the anniversary, the ones not asked back could be-and would have reasonto be- resentful.
We don't need a multi-Doctor story...most fans would want one though.
That's not a bad idea. One 4 Doctors story that BFA did didn't actually involve the 4 doctors together although the 8th doctor did have a conversation with the 5th doctor. But the stories while connected together were all separate pieces that came together at the end. Maybe we can kinda have a similar story to that. I'm not saying use the exact same story but a similar formula. It probably would be more expensive having to make multiple Tardises more than likely. And it would obviously have to involve someone going through time to each doctor.
Yea, even an extended special crammed with all 7 of them (Assuming Eccelston wouldn't want to be involved) would be too much. But, a 3 Episode arc, or even a half or full season arc could work well.
Personally, rather than a multi-Doctor reunion fest, I'd rather see a story with the incumbent Doctor and a pre-"Unearthly Child" Doctor who hasn't yet left Gallifrey. I don't know if they meet, maybe the incumbent Doctor must deal with something in his present that the pre-"UC" Doctor did or didn't do. (Shades of "Remembrance of the Daleks," with the seventh Doctor following up on the first Doctor's reasons for being in Totter's Lane.)
I'd like to go the opposite direction and have our current Doctor meet a Doctor from a very distant, future regeneration. It might even be fun to frame it from the Future Doctor's perspective and somehow have the current Doctor not realize who he's working with.
