Doctor Laser Rage.

[Guy Gardener]

Yup. Eccleston is parodying himself a little.on the Sarah Silverman Program.

"No DVD Boxset is more important than a relationship."

God help us all.

 

[Chris3123]

II saw that, though I read this thread before I watched the episode, so I wasn't surprised when Eccleston showed up.

I loved it, though. Well, the Dr. Laser Rage parts anyway.

Oh, and read this article at this guy's web site (he shot the Dr. Laser Rage segments): http://www.robschrab.com/


Anyway, are we the only two people on this board who watch both Doctor Who and The Sarah Silverman Program? It sure seems like it.

 

[The]

I watched the clips on YouTube. Pretty funny! He looks strange with such long hair...

 

[Bacl]

I want him back on Heroes. Then maybe it will be good again. Pretty funny seeing Eccleston make fun of Doctor Who.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhIf2SmQR1E

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZ1Rf0F0ezY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-12SsdsT-OQ

 

[wamdue]

its funny Teannant can do great roles like Einstein & Eddington, whilst he is on the show, whilst Eccleston leaves the show, and all he gets is things like Heroes & this.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Anyway, are we the only two people on this board who watch both Doctor Who and The Sarah Silverman Program? It sure seems like it.

Even diluted to a shadow of what's Sarah is capable, she still played the most believable human being character to ever appear on Voyager. I've been haunted by a kneejerk swoon at the lightest mention of the lady for the last 12 years.

Although apparently some people find her program offensive. Odd?

 

[The]

its funny Teannant can do great roles like Einstein & Eddington, whilst he is on the show, whilst Eccleston leaves the show, and all he gets is things like Heroes & this.

Well, to be fair, this show you mention I've never heard of. Meanwhile, Heroes is international.

And, in turn to be fair to Tennant, he's doing Royal Shakespeare and Eccleston is about to play "Destro" in the (terrifyingly horrible-looking) G.I.Joe movie.

So, all things considered, I'd say they're on equal footing...

 

[Bacl]

its funny Teannant can do great roles like Einstein & Eddington, whilst he is on the show, whilst Eccleston leaves the show, and all he gets is things like Heroes & this.

Well, to be fair, this show you mention I've never heard of. Meanwhile, Heroes is international.

And, in turn to be fair to Tennant, he's doing Royal Shakespeare and Eccleston is about to play "Destro" in the (terrifyingly horrible-looking) G.I.Joe movie.

So, all things considered, I'd say they're on equal footing...

Equal footing? So...G.I. Joe: The Movie is of the same worth as Shakespeare?

 

[Bob The Skutter]

its funny Teannant can do great roles like Einstein & Eddington, whilst he is on the show, whilst Eccleston leaves the show, and all he gets is things like Heroes & this.

Well, to be fair, this show you mention I've never heard of. Meanwhile, Heroes is international.

And, in turn to be fair to Tennant, he's doing Royal Shakespeare and Eccleston is about to play "Destro" in the (terrifyingly horrible-looking) G.I.Joe movie.

So, all things considered, I'd say they're on equal footing...

Einstein and Eddington was a TV film that was on last night, telling the story of how Eddington sat up and took notice of Einstein's theories and tried to get them accepted, at a time when the allied nations didn't want anything to do with Germans.

 

[The]

its funny Teannant can do great roles like Einstein & Eddington, whilst he is on the show, whilst Eccleston leaves the show, and all he gets is things like Heroes & this.

Well, to be fair, this show you mention I've never heard of. Meanwhile, Heroes is international.

And, in turn to be fair to Tennant, he's doing Royal Shakespeare and Eccleston is about to play "Destro" in the (terrifyingly horrible-looking) G.I.Joe movie.

So, all things considered, I'd say they're on equal footing...

Equal footing? So...G.I. Joe: The Movie is of the same worth as Shakespeare?

My point was that while Tennant does a homegrown show, Eccleston is doing an internationally broadcast show. And while Tennant is performing Shakespeare, Eccleston is doing commercial Hollywood. So, given that both have pluses and minuses, I don't see where either has an edge on the other...

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Well, to be fair, this show you mention I've never heard of. Meanwhile, Heroes is international.

And, in turn to be fair to Tennant, he's doing Royal Shakespeare and Eccleston is about to play "Destro" in the (terrifyingly horrible-looking) G.I.Joe movie.

So, all things considered, I'd say they're on equal footing...

Equal footing? So...G.I. Joe: The Movie is of the same worth as Shakespeare?

My point was that while Tennant does a homegrown show, Eccleston is doing an internationally broadcast show. And while Tennant is performing Shakespeare, Eccleston is doing commercial Hollywood. So, given that both have pluses and minuses, I don't see where either has an edge on the other...

Well Tennent was in Harry Potter, and Einstein and Eddington is also international, it's a BBC/HBO co-pro.

 

[The]

Good point about Potter, and about the Eddington movie being on HBO. But, wasn't Potter before Doctor Who? If that's the case, then you'd have to count the Hollywood productions Eccles was in before Who, as well. And while HBO is a premium pay cable, NBC broadcasts Heroes freely (as far as I know). Still, then you run into the argument of how paying for HBO and paying for your tv license in the UK compares.

Not really trying to make a major debate here, or anything. But, I'm of the opinion that I don't believe Tennant is in any more lucrative position than Eccles during/post Who era. He just happens to be currently popular with the UK crowd...

 

[wamdue]

Well, to be fair, this show you mention I've never heard of. Meanwhile, Heroes is international.

And, in turn to be fair to Tennant, he's doing Royal Shakespeare and Eccleston is about to play "Destro" in the (terrifyingly horrible-looking) G.I.Joe movie.

So, all things considered, I'd say they're on equal footing...

Equal footing? So...G.I. Joe: The Movie is of the same worth as Shakespeare?

My point was that while Tennant does a homegrown show, Eccleston is doing an internationally broadcast show. And while Tennant is performing Shakespeare, Eccleston is doing commercial Hollywood. So, given that both have pluses and minuses, I don't see where either has an edge on the other...

but a GI Joe movie, its hardly a serious actors dream come true.

 

[The]

And that's my point, exactly. Both actors are on two completely different career paths. Tennant has yet to really break out of the UK. Eccleston generally seems to be concentrating on Hollywood/commercial productions. That's two different worlds, and not what I would classify as being comparable on an even playing field...

 

[wamdue]

im sure once Tennant has left Doctor Who, and has done a couple more serious drama things, Hollywood will come knocking.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Good point about Potter, and about the Eddington movie being on HBO. But, wasn't Potter before Doctor Who? If that's the case, then you'd have to count the Hollywood productions Eccles was in before Who, as well. And while HBO is a premium pay cable, NBC broadcasts Heroes freely (as far as I know). Still, then you run into the argument of how paying for HBO and paying for your tv license in the UK compares.

Not really trying to make a major debate here, or anything. But, I'm of the opinion that I don't believe Tennant is in any more lucrative position than Eccles during/post Who era. He just happens to be currently popular with the UK crowd...

I'm not sure, they both came out around the same time, I believe, so who knows which was filmed first.
I'm sure Einstein and Eddington will be sold internationally too. As for lucrative, successful and lucrative don't exactly have to be the same thing. It seems they've both managed to keep their careers going, and I think both are good actors, it just seems a bit strange the way Christopher Eccleston has gone considering his attitude towards films, and the fact he's considered such an intense and serious actor.

 

[The]

im sure once Tennant has left Doctor Who, and has done a couple more serious drama things, Hollywood will come knocking.

Perhaps, and I would hope so. Honestly, I'm not certain he's as "loved" in the US as he is in the UK, though. Many of the American fans I've talked to preferred Eccleston to Tennant. I think, culturally, they're going to relate to a harder, leather-clad grump over a squeaky-clean, very British, geek-chic, as far as Doctor's go. I doubt this would translate to the actors themselves. However, it's going to come down to their agents, I would guess...

 

[The]

...it just seems a bit strange the way Christopher Eccleston has gone considering his attitude towards films, and the fact he's considered such an intense and serious actor.

I would agree with you. You have to wonder if it's Eccleston as a person (being seemingly so driven, intense, and serious to the point of being an asshole), or if he just has a crap agent. Or, it could be his lack of ability in adapting/losing accents. Has he ever done a part where he didn't use his natural accent? Not judging it one way or another. But, it's an issue that could stand in the way of certain roles. Whereas, Tennant seems to have a very chameleon accent, and looks more conventionally "pretty" over Eccleston's hard, goofy appearance...

 

[ClayinCA]

Eccleston didn't use his natural accent in Elizabeth (the Cate Blanchett one), in which he played the Duke of Norfolk. I know he's done RP (Received Pronunciation) in many of his other roles as well, but he was keen not to have the Doctor talk that way because it was important to him that working-class kids hear their hero speak that way and be able to relate to it.