"Clamoring". Enough now.
Original Series Doctors Protest Lack Of 50th Involvement
- Thread starter StCoop
- Start date
It's a slap in the face to not acknowledge the 42 years' worth of Doctor Who that existed before the Christopher Eccleston stories.Probably not, but no small cameo is not a "slap in the face".A small cameo would interfere with an "entertaining story"?
Enough with the
As for my use of
... when you become a moderator, you can dictate which smileys I use to express my honest sentiments.So your world is more "real" than anyone else's, right?
Newsflash: It isn't. Personally, I'd understand if Tom Baker didn't make an appearance. He may not want to, or he may not be in the best of health. I don't know for sure, but they would be reasonable reasons why he wouldn't be part of it.
However, if he wants to, and feels up to it, it would be a wonderful way of saying thank you to him and his fans, and acknowledging his part in keeping this show going for so many years.
I've been a Doctor Who fan since 2000, when I was in the fifth grade and my aunt showed me Four to Doomsday. I then got my hands on as much Doctor Who as I could find. I've read the NAs, the EDAs, and listened to a number of BF audios. So I'm an old school fan here and simply don't get the outrage.
I'd love to see some old Doctors return but if Moffat's story doesn't call for it and he thinks he can do a better job with a different approach then that's what he should do. I trust him and I see no point in complaining until after we've seen the episode.
I'd love to see some old Doctors return but if Moffat's story doesn't call for it and he thinks he can do a better job with a different approach then that's what he should do. I trust him and I see no point in complaining until after we've seen the episode.
I can ask politely, which is what I did.As for my use of
No, it's precisely the same world. That your opinion is not actively supported by legions of fans doesn't make it invalid, but it is not.Timewalker said:So your world is more "real" than anyone else's, right?
Last edited:
That seems perfectly reasonable and I agree wholeheartedly.
You are misquoting me......No, it's precisely the same world. That your opinion is not actively supported by legions of fans doesn't make it invalid, but it is not.So your world is more "real" than anyone else's, right?
My apologies. I edited the post.
On the subject of classic Doctors in the 50th...
It’s just the same old circular arguments and all it does is wind people up. Bitching about it on the internet won’t make Moffat or the BBC change their mind, and I don’t see any reason why the special can’t celebrate 50 years of Who without having to be beholden to 50 years of Who, and I say that as someone who’ll be thrilled to bits if Peter walks into the Tardis looks at Tennant and says “Not you again” but also as someone who’s primary concern is for a good story rather than a greatest hits collection.
It’s just the same old circular arguments and all it does is wind people up. Bitching about it on the internet won’t make Moffat or the BBC change their mind, and I don’t see any reason why the special can’t celebrate 50 years of Who without having to be beholden to 50 years of Who, and I say that as someone who’ll be thrilled to bits if Peter walks into the Tardis looks at Tennant and says “Not you again” but also as someone who’s primary concern is for a good story rather than a greatest hits collection.
It's ludicrous to celebrate 50 years of Doctor Who if they totally ignore the first 42 years. Hell, even if they just had a picture of an old Companion or a toy K-9 in the background or a mention of celery or jelly babies, that would be better than nothing at all.
Or, you know, the TARDIS.
I've just celebrated my 40th birthday without ever mentioning anything that happened to me during the first 35 years of my life except my birth, and I don't think it was ludicrous. That the show still exists is the only celebration that is really needed.
Every indication is that such small nods will be in the special, but I know that some people have said that's not enough.
We don't know that there will be 'nothing at all.' As I keep saying, everyone was taken by surprise by the old clips at the start of 'The Name of the Doctor', so I think that DOTD will also have nods to the old show to surprise us.
It's already been hinted (by Matt Smith among others) that we'll see paintings of them. It's the idea that that (or sticking Tom's scarf on a random UNIT scientist) is good enough, that some of us take issue with.
I certainly don't buy Moffat's excuses. He's the one who came up with the get-out clause for the actors looking older in the first place and with the exception of Colin (who'd welcome finally getting to wear something different) their outfits are no more outlandish than Matt Smith's current purple get-up. Hell, John Hurt is practically wearing McGann's Big Finish outfit.
The current TARDIS, not any of the older ones.
As for your 40th birthday, that's your own issue. I don't see anyone clamoring to know about your first 35 years, but then you're not a science fiction legend, either.
It would be fun to see appearances by all surviving Doctor actors in the anniversary special, but clocking in at about 75 minutes, even if Tom Baker and Christopher Eccleston weren't involved, we're talking six Doctors including Smith -- seven if you include John Hurt. That's a lot of people.
Moffat already tips the hat to classic Who -- arguably too frequently. I'm all for sitting back and enjoying the anniversary special on its own merits.
Moffat already tips the hat to classic Who -- arguably too frequently. I'm all for sitting back and enjoying the anniversary special on its own merits.
Yeah, the blue box.
My loved ones weren't clamoring to hear about my first 35 years because they were there and remember what happened, and they're forward-thinking people who don't think that living in the past is a viable option.
Yeah, the blue box.
My loved ones weren't clamoring to hear about my first 35 years because they were there and remember what happened, and they're forward-thinking people who don't think that living in the past is a viable option.
I wasn't there! I insist your next post includes your five year old self as a guest star!!!!
Hear, hear. If its just as good as The Name of the Doctor then we should be onto a winner.
I'm one of them, and I still don't think that catering to the whimsical tastes of fandom is the best way to tell an entertaining story.Uh-huh. Dismissing the "small segment" of fans who have supported this show for decades is a lovely slap in the face.
Including a classic Doctor isn't catering to whimsical tastes, it's celebrating the show's history!
Mr Awe
I can ask politely, which is what I did.As for my use of
No, it's precisely the same world. That your opinion is not actively supported by legions of fans doesn't make it invalid, but it is not.Timewalker said:So your world is more "real" than anyone else's, right?
Ah, but his opinion is. There are actually lots of people who want a classic Doctor to return. You can see it on this bulletin board, others, etc. You can deny it, but it's true.
Mr Awe
Similar threads
