Big Finish Multi-Doctor 50th Anny Announcement

[Allyn Gibson]

This probably rules out the classic doctors in any potential multi-doctor special. At least anything more than a blink-and-you'll-miss-it cameo. As I first thought if they decide to bring back previous Doctors it'll be Tennant and maybe Eccleston if he's willing.

I can see arguments both ways -- that it rules out "classic" Doctors for a potential multi-Doctor anniversary special and that it doesn't.

In the past, Big Finish couldn't do things that the television series was going to do. Hence, in one story with the Master they couldn't say that the character was the Master because the Master was going to appear in the series. Cardiff can say -- and has -- "No, licensee, you can't do this because it steps on our toes." Thus, the conclusion that "classic" Doctors won't be appearing on television in a multi-Doctor special in 2013 isn't an unreasonable one because Big Finish was given permission to do this.

On the other hand, it's possible that Cardiff knows that fans want to see and hear Doctors getting together and doing Doctor-ish things and decided that "stepping on toes" was okay because it's the anniversary.

To be honest, the former possibility is the one that I feel is the right one -- no pre-Eccleston Doctors in a televised anniversary special.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

Awesome news! Not only are all five of the living classic Doctors in it, but also Leela, Nyssa, Peri, Ace, and Charley! And The Master! And more?! And it'll be 100 minutes long? AND they will be a five-disc limited special edition with more material?

Yeah. Big Finish, take my money. NOW.

As for BBC's plans, I'm not going to even bother speculating. What's the point? Why damper the wonderful news we just got?

Also, the synopsis is on the order page:

November 23rd 1963 proves to be a significant day in the lives of all eight Doctors…
It's the day that Bob Dovie's life is ripped apart…

It's also a day that sets in motion a catastrophic chain of events which forces the first eight incarnations of the Doctor to fight for their very existence. As a mysterious, insidious chaos unfolds within the TARDIS, the barriers of time break apart…


From suburban England through war-torn alien landscapes and into a deadly, artificial dimension, all these Doctors and their companions must struggle against the power of an unfathomable, alien technology.

From the very beginning, it is clear that the Master is somehow involved. By the end, for the Doctors, there may only be darkness.

 

[Mr Awe]

@Allynn, That sounds like an arbitrary distinction. Surely you could include one classic Doctor?!

 

[StCoop]

@Allynn, That sounds like an arbitrary distinction. Surely you could include one classic Doctor?!

Don't forget that most of the people watching now have never seen a pre-2005 episode. I'm sure they'll work clips of 1-8 into the episode somehow but it'll be 11, 10 and (if he's in a good mood) 9 in person.

 

[Mr Awe]

^^ Hmmmph. I hope you're wrong!

I figure it won't be classic-centered, but surely just one classic Doc wouldn't confuse people too much.

 

[davejames]

Like everyone else, I hope we get a multi-Doctor story, but somehow I have a feeling Moffat is going to do some other kind of homage, like having Smith revisit planets from previous episodes, or having him flash back to previous Doctors (like Picard in All Good Things) while wearing their various costumes.

Which would definitely be fun, but still not as cool as seeing the original actors again.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

On the one hand, I need money. On the other hand, Big Finish knows exactly how to seduce me. Oh, decisions....

I kinda also want them to involve the Valeyard and the unspecified future Doctor from the most recent UNIT story, just because they can!

Shame we won't be getting any Brigadier or Liz Shaw.

As for whatever TV special the BBC cooks up, I hope they at least remember that they're celebrating the 50th anniversary of the ENTIRE franchise. There will be plenty of time to celebrate the new series when it turns 10 in 2015.

 

[Nightowl1701]

It says THE FIRST EIGHT Doctors.

Just pointing that out...

Most likely that means Peter "Steven" Purves as the First Doctor, David Troughton as (his father) the Second Doctor, and I don't know who (Sean Pertwee?) as the Third.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

It says THE FIRST EIGHT Doctors.

Just pointing that out...

Most likely that means Peter "Steven" Purves as the First Doctor, David Troughton as (his father) the Second Doctor, and I don't know who (Sean Pertwee?) as the Third.

I very much doubt that. David Troughton and Sean Pertwee have repeatedly said they won't portray their fathers' characters. I don't see Peter Purves, William Russell or Frazer Hines playing the First and Second Doctors either because they only did it in the Companion Chronicle narration format instead of playing them outright. I don't see a Companion Chronicle narration working here.

Instead, I expect there will be references to the first three Doctors being involved without directly "seeing" them.

 

[ToddCam]

Oy, this overwhelming disdain for recasting dead actors... I really wish people would just let it go. For the 60th anniversary, we may not have Tom Baker anymore, and who knows who else will be gone, especially companion-wise (William Russell is quite the older fellow). Don't get me wrong, as I am in no way trying to limit the life of any of these fine actors, but I think limiting our ability to have earlier Doctor stories based on the lifespans of the actors who played them is kind of shooting yourself in the foot. Why can't it just be done respectfully? When Carole Ann Ford, William Russell, Maureen O'Brien, Peter Purves, Jean Marsh, and Anneke Wills are gone, is the First Doctor closed off forever? Are people really that offended by Richard Hurndall? I almost understand the view for TV, for surely the audio medium should give you a little leeway...

As this is a Star Trek board, I am reminded of DeForest Kelley and James Doohan. I know it's not a direct analogy given the nature of the Doctor (though not the Companions), but should we not be able to have Bones and Scotty stories because those great men have passed on?

 

[VDCNI]

Also coming from Big Finish for the 50th a Main Range trilogy with stories for the 5th, 6th & 7th Doctor's - all set in 1963 and the 7th Doctor will be meeting the Rememberance Of The Daleks supporting cast (who got their own Big Finish spin off last year - Counter Measures)

Plus a Companion Chronicles trilogy featuring Terry Malloy as a time lord called Stoyn. Part one is a First Doctor & Susan story showing their first ever journey in the TARDIS. The second has the Second Doctor, Jamie & Zoe in a story linked to The War Games and the third is a 4th Doctor & Romana story which was originally supposed to feature both Romana's but Mary Tamm was too ill to record it, they've rewritten it to make it a tribute to her but it's not clear who will be in it.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

^I just read all of those news items over at GallifreyBase, and while I'm a bit overwhelmed with all of the great news all at once, I'm also very excited!

Oy, this overwhelming disdain for recasting dead actors... I really wish people would just let it go. For the 60th anniversary, we may not have Tom Baker anymore, and who knows who else will be gone, especially companion-wise (William Russell is quite the older fellow). Don't get me wrong, as I am in no way trying to limit the life of any of these fine actors, but I think limiting our ability to have earlier Doctor stories based on the lifespans of the actors who played them is kind of shooting yourself in the foot. Why can't it just be done respectfully? When Carole Ann Ford, William Russell, Maureen O'Brien, Peter Purves, Jean Marsh, and Anneke Wills are gone, is the First Doctor closed off forever? Are people really that offended by Richard Hurndall? I almost understand the view for TV, for surely the audio medium should give you a little leeway...

As this is a Star Trek board, I am reminded of DeForest Kelley and James Doohan. I know it's not a direct analogy given the nature of the Doctor (though not the Companions), but should we not be able to have Bones and Scotty stories because those great men have passed on?

I'm not saying I'm against it in this format, but I am saying I don't think it'll happen for the reasons I stated.

 

[Pindar]

I very much doubt that. David Troughton and Sean Pertwee have repeatedly said they won't portray their fathers' characters.

David Troughton did the audio book of Wheel of Ice where he does an excellent turn as the second doctor.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

I very much doubt that. David Troughton and Sean Pertwee have repeatedly said they won't portray their fathers' characters.

David Troughton did the audio book of Wheel of Ice where he does an excellent turn as the second doctor.

He also said in a Doctor Who Magazine about one of the Tom Baker audio projects that he doesn't object to playing the second Doctor and that no one had ever asked him before.

 

[Mr Awe]

For the 60th anniversary, we may not have Tom Baker anymore, and who knows who else will be gone, especially companion-wise (William Russell is quite the older fellow).

I'm not so sure about recasting the role. But, agree with your point about actors passing on. It's inevitable. And, it was that short term thinking that prevented Nicholas Courtney from appearing in the new series. That's terrible! Yeah, I know that he was on the SJA, but it's not the same.

We should bring back the surviving actors for the TV series while they're still with us. Once they're gone, they're gone. That's assuming, of course, that they want to come back. If not, entirely different matter.

Mr Awe

 

[Relayer1]

I'm all for recasting if for whatever reason the original actor is unavailable. David Trough ton and Sean Pertwee would be ideal if they would agree to do it, not only because of the family connections and similar voices, but they would also look enough like their parents to do it on the TV.

Sadly Tom will probably be the next to go. Who would you recast - Jon Culshaw ?

 

[Stevil2001]

I don't understand the appeal of recasting. I like the first Doctor because I like William Hartnell, not a pale imitation of him. Jon Culshaw does a good enough imitation of Tom Baker for comedic purposes, but I like Tom Baker as the Doctor, not him.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

I very much doubt that. David Troughton and Sean Pertwee have repeatedly said they won't portray their fathers' characters.

David Troughton did the audio book of Wheel of Ice where he does an excellent turn as the second doctor.

He also said in a Doctor Who Magazine about one of the Tom Baker audio projects that he doesn't object to playing the second Doctor and that no one had ever asked him before.

I stand corrected. I could have sworn I read somewhere that David Troughton didn't want to portray his father's role.

That being said, I know I've seen such interviews with Sean Pertwee.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

I stand corrected. I could have sworn I read somewhere that David Troughton didn't want to portray his father's role.

It's always been reported as such.

It was even said back in the early-90s that he was uncomfortable with the news that he was going to be "cast" as the eighth Doctor when Virgin planned to regenerate the seventh Doctor in the NAs. Then it was said that he posed for publicity photos for Virgin, but then it turned out that the supposed photos were from A Very Peculiar Practice and he wasn't aware that Virgin had planned for him to be the "model" for the eighth Doctor.

From all indications, however, he's enjoyed portraying the second Doctor on audio.

That being said, I know I've seen such interviews with Sean Pertwee.

What I've heard is that Sean Pertwee would like to portray the Doctor, but not the third Doctor.

To me, he doesn't sound much like his father.

 

[The Wormhole]

I almost understand the view for TV, for surely the audio medium should give you a little leeway...

Maybe at some point re-casting of characters played by dead actors might happen in the audios, but an audio drama celebrating the 50th anniversary (or any anniversary) doesn't really seem like the most appropriate place to start.

As this is a Star Trek board, I am reminded of DeForest Kelley and James Doohan. I know it's not a direct analogy given the nature of the Doctor (though not the Companions), but should we not be able to have Bones and Scotty stories because those great men have passed on?

That doesn't really compare, aside from Trek XI there hasn't been anything on screen featuring those characters since the early 1990s. Star Trek doesn't have audio dramas so using characters whose actor has died isn't really an issue. Aside from TV and movies, the only other medium Trek has are the novels. And Doctor Who does do novels featuring such characters. We recentally had a new novel featuring the Second Doctor and there's another one coming featuring the Third Doctor, the Brigadier, and the Delgado Master.