Even if RTD did intend that the Ninth Doctor had fought the time war initially, it seems that by "Journey's End" he had changed his mind, given the talk about how the Ninth Doctor had been "born in battle, full of blood and anger and revenge" like 10.5.Was that line actually written or did Eccleston just ad-lib it on set? I agree that if RTD meant what he said that it was the Ninth Doctor that fought the Time War wouldn't make sense if he wrote that line. But it's possible Eccleston thought it up on the spot and it was kept in because everyone else liked it.
Even if RTD did intend that the Ninth Doctor had fought the time war initially, it seems that by "Journey's End" he had changed his mind, given the talk about how the Ninth Doctor had been "born in battle, full of blood and anger and revenge" like 10.5.Was that line actually written or did Eccleston just ad-lib it on set? I agree that if RTD meant what he said that it was the Ninth Doctor that fought the Time War wouldn't make sense if he wrote that line. But it's possible Eccleston thought it up on the spot and it was kept in because everyone else liked it.
Agreed.Still, the question of whether the line implying a recent regeneration in Rose was actually written by RTD or ad-libbed by Eccleston is a legitimate one all the same. If for no other reason than simple curiosity.
My personal 'fanon' is that 'The Moment' required so much energy that, with an adequate power supply unavailable, The Doctor actually had to unleash his regeneration energy to fuel it (essentially committing suicide). Doing so 'blew the cap' on whatever normally keeps regeneration under such tight control, which is why his last couple have been so much flashier and violent than the old ones ever were.
I think he's referring to regenerations. The fireworks we have now are quite destructive, unlike the old series which didn't have the flash and boom of current regenerations.My personal 'fanon' is that 'The Moment' required so much energy that, with an adequate power supply unavailable, The Doctor actually had to unleash his regeneration energy to fuel it (essentially committing suicide). Doing so 'blew the cap' on whatever normally keeps regeneration under such tight control, which is why his last couple have been so much flashier and violent than the old ones ever were.
Violent?
One tries to smash a man's head in, two was happy to blow up ships with bombs, three was happy to work for an organisation that committed genocide and five was tasty with a pistol - that's just off the top of my head.
Even if RTD did intend that the Ninth Doctor had fought the time war initially, it seems that by "Journey's End" he had changed his mind, given the talk about how the Ninth Doctor had been "born in battle, full of blood and anger and revenge" like 10.5.Was that line actually written or did Eccleston just ad-lib it on set? I agree that if RTD meant what he said that it was the Ninth Doctor that fought the Time War wouldn't make sense if he wrote that line. But it's possible Eccleston thought it up on the spot and it was kept in because everyone else liked it.
True, not to mention BBC tie-in material does suggest the Eighth Doctor was the one that fought the Time War.
Still, the question of whether the line implying a recent regeneration in Rose was actually written by RTD or ad-libbed by Eccleston is a legitimate one all the same. If for no other reason than simple curiosity.
Why do I get the feeling this special is going to generate a lot of canon vs fanon debates?
Posting this here as it's about BBc politics and bureaucracy, so this seems like the best place...
The BBC announced today that it is to close its Digital Media Initiative (DMI). http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2013/digital-media-initiative.html
Relevance to us is that the BBC budget had been drawn up on the assumption that this would succeed, and deliver substantial savings. So there's going to be a hole in the budget for the next few years which will probably have to be filled with cuts in budgets across the board. Oh dear.
Well they could always cut down on the number of Eastenders episodes per week in order to save money.
Never happen I know.
Yep. Once a standing-set soap is up and running, it's far cheaper than any alternative.. at least any drama alternative.Well they could always cut down on the number of Eastenders episodes per week in order to save money.
Never happen I know.
Wouldn't save money. It would cost them more to get more shows up and running to fill those gaps in the schedule.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.