Ever seen tom baker appearance in the day of the doctor,i and other dr who fans have been wondering is the caretaker the 4th doctor retired looking after the museum?.
is the caretaker the 4th doctor?.
- Thread starter Mr Pointy Ears
- Start date
A lot of talk about it in this thread... http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=231586
The consensus among viewers is that he's a future version beyond the 13th incarnation who has chosen to re-use the 4th Doctor's body as if it were a desktop theme.
Then again, the writers of the show have intentionally left it ambiguous enough that anything's possible.
Then again, the writers of the show have intentionally left it ambiguous enough that anything's possible.
It was strongly implied that this was a glimpse into the Doctor's future, but it was left slightly ambiguous. "I might be you, but then again, you might be me."
On the surface, it can't be the Fourth Doctor, since we saw a much younger Fourth Doctor regenerate in "Logopolis." The only way he could be that old is if he took an extended side trip sometime during the period in "The Leisure Hive" when he was turned into an old man.
Then again, in "Logopolis," he did interact with a projection of his next incarnation, the Watcher. Maybe the Curator could be some kind of projection of the Fourth Doctor spinning off from the same event.
Still, I think the most likely explanation is the one pretty much stated in dialogue, that he's a future Doctor revisiting old faces.
On the surface, it can't be the Fourth Doctor, since we saw a much younger Fourth Doctor regenerate in "Logopolis." The only way he could be that old is if he took an extended side trip sometime during the period in "The Leisure Hive" when he was turned into an old man.
Then again, in "Logopolis," he did interact with a projection of his next incarnation, the Watcher. Maybe the Curator could be some kind of projection of the Fourth Doctor spinning off from the same event.
Still, I think the most likely explanation is the one pretty much stated in dialogue, that he's a future Doctor revisiting old faces.
For me personally, there's no doubt that it was intended as an unspecified future incarnation. I'm sure that the only reason it was left ambiguous was so that future producers wouldn't find themselves in a situation where they felt forced to account for this incarnation.
It's a reason certainly, but I wouldn't call it the only one. Really, I think they just want the character to be open to interpretation and that he can be whoever anyone wants him to be. Someday, someone might have their own story to tell about the Curator, not likely on TV, but perhaps in a novel, or audio drama or whatever. They have a blank slate to work from, as opposed to being required to depict him as a future Doctor. Now he can also be another Time Lord, the Moment in a different form or even really a humble old Curator.
Though I personally maintain that Tom Baker just wandered onto set and started jabbering to Matt Smith and everyone else was like "better film it."
And yes, I am joking.
Or am I?
Who knows?
WHO NOSE?
Yeah, most likely.
Personally, thats my favorite fan theory out there. Coupled with the Fourth Doctor's last line, it kind of works, once you realize that wasn't their intention of course.
If being The Curator or The Great Curator is really The Doctors idea of retirement then how is it a demotion?
He was referring to the OP's title, the Caretaker, which is a bit lower in rank than curator.
You're right, of course. Not sure how "only" crept into my last post.
Your Tom Baker wandering onto the set theory is a good one, except I'd hope that the producers would have the good sense to recognize the precedent they'd be setting. We'd probably have random Tom Baker cameos in every-other episode for the next ten years if they let that happen.
But really, what other choice do they have? Who actually wants to be known as "the guy who threw Tom Baker off the set of Doctor Who"?
It would be a funny extra for dvd sets to have Tom show up at random in various episodes. The chances for improv comedy could be wonderful to behold. or terrible.
I guess that, for all we know, he's been showing up and filming scenes since the relaunch in 2005. Maybe this is just the first time they decided to leave one in.
When I originally saw the episode I thought it was 4 because I wanted it to be 4. Now I think that this scenario is more likely.
