It didn't do his career much good. Tennant has had more high profile leading roles in three years since he left than Baker had in thirty.
You hit the nail on the head with Type-casting. Tom Baker couldn't get any other big roles when he left Doctor Who. So, sure, he had an iconic role (And due to Big Finish, it's providing him a decent income in his later years), but, how much money might he have made all those years in between, if he had only stayed for 2 or 3 years and therefore had an easier time getting other big roles?
Never said it did. Agree that typecasting is an issue. Still, it's hard to hit it big as an actor in the US. So, it's a tradeoff. Stay in an iconic role, but be typecast. Or, leave and have a small chance of hitting it big. I'm not begrudging anyone for leaving the role and trying. I can see the motivation and totally respect the decision. But, the odds are not in their favor. Simple fact. Mr Awe
I'll remind folks that the original cast of Star Trek were typecast here in the states with less than a full three year run. I'd love to see Matt Smith hit it big, but he just doesn't have the looks for it here in the States.
I suppose he could manage romcomcs, and there's always villains. Hollywood loves to cast Brits as villains. Elementary needs a Moriarty.
Also, the Doctor tells Wilf in The End of Time he's 906, making it clear that there is no real gap between Waters of Mars and The End of Time, despite earlier intentions.
Even so - isn't Smith on buttons compared to what the previous two doctors were getting?* Even a couple of failed things are likely to be decent earners for him relative to Dr. Who. Moreover, the idea that the odds are against him is surely even better at the start of his career than now? * partly because of when he signed - at the peak of the BBC pay scandal.
You know, honestily, I wouldn't put too much stock into what the Doctor says his age is. I think there's been at least decades, if not centuries worth of years that the Doctor either forgot to count or chooses not to.
I think Smith will film one more season and then go, From the looks of it after the end of this season we have just a one off special and Christmas special and then the show returns to an April start. Now if the BBC split the seasons up I could see Smith leaving next May halfway through as maybe Moffat would prefer that but if the BBC air it in one go then He'll go until episode 13.
That's only how long they've been considered as the present doctor, but remember McGann is actually the doctor with the shortest screen time. Although McCoy most likely lasted longer than the rest due to his aging for a start, I categorise longest serving doctor as the doctor who has been the latest doctor while the series was still on air. So I don't really say for example "The McCoy years- 1987-1996" as he only cameos in the 96 film really, so I classify the McCoy years as 87-89. But that's just me. In my mind, Tom Baker is and always has been the longest serving doctor. If we're doing it with most stories, Tennant wins as he's been in the show longer than Smith so far, Eccleston only lasted a series, and the others were in serials.
They're not splitting it up this time, it was announced. They said it was "an unsuccessful experiment". Quite frankly I'm glad. I think Smith will either go at the end of eight, or maybe we can have a mid season regeneration! I doubt he'll leave at Christmas. They'll probably do it how they did with the Eccleston-Tennant transition and have Smith regenerate at the end of series 8 episode thirteen like they did with Eccleston only with a bigger bang, then like Tennant, the 12th doctors first episode will the 2014 Christmas special. I do hope that in the 8th series we'll see the master again. Smith would be great with the master. I could imagine him with either John Simms again or Benedict Cumberbatch as the Master. Although Omega would be even cooler. Ooh, maybe Omega can be the regeneration villain!!!!
Yea, the Logistics of keeping track of his age would be a nightmare. How does one keep track of how many years have passed, when they flit around through all of Time and Space, and rarely stay in the same time Zone or even on the same Planet for more than a few days? What Planet’s orbit do you keep track of years by? Surely Earth and Gallilfrey don’t have the same length of year. So, someone not from some other Planet wouldn’t even have the same reference as Earthlings or Gallifreyans In the Classic Series, he stated lower Ages in later Regenerations than he stated in earlier Regenerations. One of the Classic Doctors, I believe stated he was over 1000, and yet 11 started out in his early 900s
I dunno, that's still a couple years at least. That's a lot of adventures when you're the Doctor. The idea that you need a 50-year gap to have lots of unseen adventures isn't really true.
The End of Time Part 2, where the Doctor gives his age as 906 aired two years after Voyage of the Damned where he gave his age as 903. So, in order to age three years in only two years in the real world, there's likely a year of unchronicled adventures, most likely his post-season 4 life.
"An unsuccessful experiment" comes from Whistleblower's blog, which was apparently a piece of performance art designed to punk fandom. Personally, I think the split seasons are an unsuccessful experiment. Season six's narrative structure didn't work, though season seven's structure is a bit better because there are two distinct halves. If the split seasons were scrapped and we got a single run of nine or ten episodes instead, I'd be fine with that.
Hard to believe Smith will have done 44 episodes after this year. Kinda feels like he just started in the role.
The big problem with all the stuff about the Doctor's age is that the one absolutely definite one we have, in Time and the Rani, contradicts all the 10th/11th Doctor references to him being 900-ish. It's definite that the Doctor is 951* in Time and the Rani, because he knows that he's the same age as the Rani, and he guesses that she's used her age as her pin code, and his guess is right. So he must be 951 then or else the pincode wouldn't be right. Of course, you can use the Gallifreyan years/Earth years get outs to get round this, but unless you ignore T&tR (I wish I could, hate it with a vengeance) there's no way round the point that both the Doctor and the Rani are 951 years old by some frame of reference at that point. Edit: *Sorry, 953. At least that's it in the book. I swore i'd never read that thing again, so don't force me to check it another time.