Yeah, but we've had season after season of entertaining stories so why not cater to the whimsical tastes of fandom just this once?
Original Series Doctors Protest Lack Of 50th Involvement
- Thread starter StCoop
- Start date
Yeah, but we've had season after season of entertaining stories so why not cater to the whimsical tastes of fandom just this once?
I find that ironic in a weird way. If you search the tag Moffat or Moffhate on tumblr. A lot of fans criticize Moffat for injecting his own fanboyism in to the show. A common complaint is that Moffat has turned the Doctor in to a "infantile James Bond" character.
What do you mean, just this once? All last season had little mentions of Doctor Who history that only fans would recognize. Like in Cold War, when the TARDIS saved itself--that was a 2nd Doctor reference.
Hell, the Name of the Doctor was all about the Doctor's past. With appearances by all of the Doctors.
See we know you're kidding now if you consider that Name of the Doctor had appearances by all of the Doctors.
I don’t think you see the point, he isn’t doing it so he can enjoy Who in 50 years, he’s doing it so Who can carry on for the next 50 years.
As a Greek philosopher once said. “Civilisations grow great when old men plant trees under whose shade they know they’ll never sit.”
I always find it amusing that the anti-Moffat crew tend to split into two factions. Those who claim he’s dumbed it down, and those who claim he’s made it too complicated
people were more consistent in their critiques of RTD 
All the Doctors were referenced and we saw/heard stock footage relating to all of them (I think!)
The dumbed-down/too complicated thing isn't as insane as it sounds. I don't necessarily agree with either criticism, but I do think Moffat has a habit of creating some very interesting, compelling and (occasionally)complex drama and then wrapping it up with a nonsensical or contrived (see: stupid) ending. He rarely establishes firm rules, which can trivialize the ensuing conflict with solutions out of nowhere, or cause it to spin out of control as new twists create layers of increasingly implausible plotting where the viewer must actively ignore significant details (see: the decline of the Weeping Angels). Complexity does not equal sophistication, and a complicated plot can absolutely be a stupid one.
Thats a well reasoned take on the matter.
Yeah, so none of them appeared in the episode. It was stock footage. Mona Lisa doesn't get a credit if there is a scene with the painting in the background.
That reminds me. Moffat mentioned if a Classic Doctor was to be brought back, Hartnell would be the one that should be. Hartnell's Doctor was pretty gruff at the start (Taking off in the TARDIS with Ian and Barbara aboard knowing full well he may never be able to return them to their time; almost cracking the caveman's skull...), until his companions mellowed him. All the other Doctors have taken after Troughton, to some degree, yet HurtDoctor did something horrifying and shameful. Amy and River have both warned The Doctor not to travel alone.
Maybe HurtDoctor is what Hartnell could've/would've become without the Companions mellowing him?
I'm curious. Three Doctors are dead and three have aged considerably since their time in the TARDIS. One refuses to come back to the show.
How exactly do you think they should've appeared in the episode in such circumstances?
Yep, and they were all great! So...
These photos have been circulating Tumblr as of this morning
David Bradley as The First Doctor
Claudia Grant as Susan
Jemma Powell as Barbra Wright and Jamie Glover as Ian Chesterton.
Pictures from Mark Gatiss' "Adventure's in Time". Set to debut on Nov 12.
http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2013-10-18/an-adventure-in-space-and-time-new-pictures-of-david-bradley-jessica-raine-and-brian-cox
I didn't say they shoud (have). I'm just pointing out that none of the (surviving) Doctors actually appeared (in new footage), which is fine for this episode. For the 50th though, I think some others should have been included.
I just realized that in 2013, six different actors will play the role of the Doctor.
@Photoman15Ah, okay, I understand now.
I really would have liked to see McGann and Eccleston and I would've creamed my pants had Davison and Tom Baker appeared (though I tend to think that their physical appearances would cause problems). I really couldn't care less if Colin Baker or Sly McCoy appeared but I recognise that they're part of DW history and have their fans and I think McCoy has aged well enough to have been included without any great difficulty. Ultimately, I'm going to try to just enjoy this episode for what it is, not what I want it to be.
To borrow Starkers' analogy, though, ST celebrated its 30th anniversary in DS9, which used existing footage and in Voyager which had a new performance from George Takei and Grace Lee Whitney. But I think most people regard the former as by far the better episode. Hopefully the absence of new footage from old Doctors in DOTD doesn't hamper it from being a good story.
I really would have liked to see McGann and Eccleston and I would've creamed my pants had Davison and Tom Baker appeared (though I tend to think that their physical appearances would cause problems). I really couldn't care less if Colin Baker or Sly McCoy appeared but I recognise that they're part of DW history and have their fans and I think McCoy has aged well enough to have been included without any great difficulty. Ultimately, I'm going to try to just enjoy this episode for what it is, not what I want it to be.
To borrow Starkers' analogy, though, ST celebrated its 30th anniversary in DS9, which used existing footage and in Voyager which had a new performance from George Takei and Grace Lee Whitney. But I think most people regard the former as by far the better episode. Hopefully the absence of new footage from old Doctors in DOTD doesn't hamper it from being a good story.
Personally, I wanted an Eccleston-Tennant-Smith ensemble, with McGann featuring briefly but substancially, ala First Doctor in The Three Doctors.
Well, at least they got Tennant. And its John Hurt in there too, so it must be interesting.
Well, at least they got Tennant. And its John Hurt in there too, so it must be interesting.
William Hartnell was dead even before The Five Doctors, in 1983. The role of the First Doctor was played by Richard Hurndall, and he's dead, too.
If they couldn't get the actual Doctors, I'd be happy with Companions, especially those from the first 5 Doctors (never liked Peri, Mel, or Ace).
Similar threads
