14th Doctor is Here! BBC Children in Need 2023!

[Emperor-Tiberius]

Yeah, I'm not sure RTD's idea there is entirely right. I get every bit of what he intended with the look, but isn't the idea that this is a brilliant scientist who's handicapped and yet he still chooses to be ultimately evil? There's an incredible irony of an incapacitated individual still pushing his limited resources towards the destruction of reality. I love that idea and I only wish he'd reconsider, but think it's unlikely.

As for the skit itself - its a skit, isn't it? Perfectly serviceable and a great taste of Tennant as the Doctor, who gave me some Whittaker vibes there? Although the Doctor calling himself a "brilliant woman" is a bit too narcissistic (but understandably, in the sense of the show recognizing Whittaker's contributions to the part). Yeah, he's still got it.

But the "timelines are rupturing" line is telling. I've not read the comic, did that divulge anything? This is gonna tie to the Tales of the TARDIS, isn't it?

 

[Admiral Qu'irk]

Already seeing people elsewhere complaining about "continuity errors" so I'll just note that the Doctor specifically said that "the timelines and canon are rupturing." I dunno whether that was supposed to be meta or serious (or both) but given that this face is back I could see it being something actually changing history that's going to be followed up on in the specials.

As a self-aware parody of its own show and this is a skit for Children in Need, it's honestly a funny little one-off that clearly is laughing at itself in a multifaceted way. All but one, but before I digress -- if it's really supposed to be a direct continuation from "The Power of the Doctor", it's just a lead-in to a Doctor Who multiverse and possibly one that will have people saying "Hey Chris, all is forgiven regarding that thingy with The Timeless Children".

I wouldn't begin to take that presentation even remotely seriously.

 

[Admiral Qu'irk]

Yeah, I'm not sure RTD's idea there is entirely right. I get every bit of what he intended with the look, but isn't the idea that this is a brilliant scientist who's handicapped and yet he still chooses to be ultimately evil? There's an incredible irony of an incapacitated individual still pushing his limited resources towards the destruction of reality. I love that idea and I only wish he'd reconsider, but think it's unlikely.

As for the skit itself - its a skit, isn't it? Perfectly serviceable and a great taste of Tennant as the Doctor, who gave me some Whittaker vibes there? Although the Doctor calling himself a "brilliant woman" is a bit too narcissistic (but understandably, in the sense of the show recognizing Whittaker's contributions to the part). Yeah, he's still got it.

It's probably just RTD or Tennant making up for the fan furore over how Whittaker regenerated into Tennant, with a completely different wardrobe in the process for whatever reasons they believed were necessary at the time.

 

[Rich Watson]

Here's the thing; he didn't need to make this episode at all. Just never mention Davros again and the "problem" is solved. He's only appeared in two stories since the series came back anyway.

But I think the fact that this was made as part of the shooting for the Series/Season Whatever finale was a chance to get the retcon out of the way before he returns in the series proper.

 

[The Nightmare Doctor]

Coming back to the positive, here's a sneak peak at the Unleashed episode:

Not clear to me where and when the full episode is out. I just checked Disney+ and there's nothing.

 

[Saul]

Are the Daleks scheduled to return anytime soon? I assumed this was getting them out of the way/related to the contractually obligated once a season appearance of the Daleks deal.

 

[Chaos Descending]

Are the Daleks scheduled to return anytime soon?

According to RTD (who sometimes lies), no.

I assumed this was getting them out of the way/related to the contractually obligated once a season appearance of the Daleks deal.

According to RTD (who sometimes lies), there's no such contractual obligation.

 

[Rich Watson]

According to RTD (who sometimes lies), there's no such contractual obligation.

Moffat said exactly the same thing years ago. It's not even an idea that makes any sense when you think about it.

 

[Saul]

Except the Daleks have shown up in some form throughout the modern era run. Even when producers said they were giving them a rest for a season there would be some glimpse of them.

 

[Chaos Descending]

Except the Daleks have shown up in some form throughout the modern era run. Even when producers said they were giving them a rest for a season there would be some glimpse of them.

They are popular. That alone is sufficient to explain it.

 

[Turbo]

Nope. According to Russell in the making-of episode this is what Davros always looked like and will look like if he ever appears again. And yes it's for exactly the bullshit "can't show someone in a wheelchair being evil" reasons you're imagining.

If this is the sort of pathetic pandering that's going to drive the series going forward I'm feeling a lot less optimistic about the future.

Oh no, we’re trying to move away from stereotypes! How awful!

 

[Sci]

1. starts with copping old music - check
2. continues with decades'-trite banshee wailing muzak - check
3. trite muzak drowning out spoken dialogue - check
4. Copping lines from and condensing "Genesis of the Daleks" into a throwaway - check
5. Technically, they were originally called "Dals", but the audience won't notice... if not, an inane one-liner about "timelines" will take care of it all, no creativity required - unless the goal is to blame the audience for having expectations of what a celebration is supposed to be, and usually they aren't consciously self-effacing
6. Who's the target audience of this?! Not fans as this all but denigrates "Genesis of the Daleks" for the sake of cheap jokes and this isn't season 17...
7. "touch nothing, is that understood" was done far better in the Red Dwarf episode "Bodyswap" (and is actually funny there)
8. Tennant's first speech is a retread of Ten. So much for Fourteen being different. So much for "radically different" as well, Unless That's Part Of The Joke But Who Cares... hey, get it, "Who cares"?
9. The toilet plunger ha-ha-bonk, complete with more muzak.

"Dimensions in Time"'s respectability just skyrocketed. Fan groups who used to have all the fun of mocking the show now feel robbed of the opportunities if the main show is going to try to do it for them. /s...

Your complaints are unreasonable and imply a lack of a capacity for playfulness about Doctor Who.

 

[Rich Watson]

Oh no, we’re trying to move away from stereotypes! How awful!

Because a world where anyone who isn't a able-bodied straight white man can't be portrayed as a villain isn't insulting and patronising in the slightest. Right?

 

[Pindar]

Coming back to the positive, here's a sneak peak at the Unleashed episode:

Not clear to me where and when the full episode is out. I just checked Disney+ and there's nothing.

It's on iplayer I think they said on children in need

 

[Tosk]

Erasing a disabled character doesn't help anything. It only marginalizes them further.
If you're worried because your only disabled character is a baddie, then introduce one (or more) who is a goodie. (But not a Goodie.)

I can't help but think about how if Davros were the only Asian character they had and then they decided that it was a bit racist to have a villainous Asian character so they recast him to be white...

 

[Rich Watson]

Erasing a disabled character doesn't help anything. It only marginalizes them further.
If you're worried because your only disabled character is a baddie, then introduce one (or more) who is a goodie.

We already have Ruth Madely set to appear in multiple episodes and Lenny Rush appearing as well.

When I'm in work on Monday I'll run this news by my non-DW watching but wheelchair using colleague to get their opinion but having known them for years I've a good idea already.

 

[Admiral Qu'irk]

It's a comedy short of charity, don't take it so seriously.

Yeah, I did allude to that later in another thread response. And you're right. This piece is a nice bit of fluff, nothing more.

 

[Admiral Qu'irk]

He's not evil because he's in a wheelchair. He's evil because he's a FUCKING NAZI.

And where does this stop? No more Cybermen, I guess, because that's offensive to people with prosthetic body parts.

It's a weird association that some have made for sure. Being in a wheelchair is not synonymous with being eeeeeeeeeeevil. Where the heck did that mindset come from, talk about reading into things way too much!

Erasing a disabled character doesn't help anything. It only marginalizes them further.

Very true.

If you're worried because your only disabled character is a baddie, then introduce one (or more) who is a goodie. (But not a Goodie.)

^^this. By far, ^^this.

Also, "The Goodies" had some fun moments back in its original run.

 

[Tosk]

Also, "The Goodies" had some fun moments back in its original run.

Just to be clear, I love The Goodies. I just don't think that putting Graham Garden or Bill Oddie in your production will make up for removing a disabled character that used to be there.

 

[Anson Mount Seleya]

Already some people online complaining that it retcons Davros to not be in the chair. I assumed, like you, that this is just pre accident Davros?

Indeed, and in The Writer's Tale RTD even provided a portion from the script of The Stole Earth/Journey's End of a flashback scene showing pre-injury Davros without the chair. And honestly, I've always assumed Davros needed the chair because of his injuries. Are there people who actually think Davros always needed a wheelchair, even before being injured? Wouldn't child Davros walking and running around in the premiere of Capaldi's second season pretty much already prove that wasn't the case?

Are the Daleks scheduled to return anytime soon?

They're almost certainly going to show up in Gatwa's first season. There is that whole "you're not truly the Doctor until you face the Daleks" thing after all.

According to RTD (who sometimes lies), there's no such contractual obligation.

Except the Daleks have shown up in some form throughout the modern era run. Even when producers said they were giving them a rest for a season there would be some glimpse of them.

There is no contractual obligation to use the Daleks, but there is BBC pressure to use them. RTD spoke of how BBC always wanted Daleks used in the season premieres but that he was usually able to mollify them by using the Daleks in finales or two parters instead.

I do get the impression Moffat likely bowed to BBC pressure though. He used Daleks in three of his six season premiere and with one exception, Daleks usually showed up in one of the first three episodes of the season, which basically came off as "there, you got your Dalek episode out of the way, now get all the way off my back." And in the case of that one exception, Daleks ended up in the finale. Chibnall it seems was able to mollify BBC by using Daleks in the holiday specials.