With just reading in the paper about David leaving who after the specials do we have any idea who is going to replace him?
Question about the 2010 series. BIG SPOILER
- Thread starter Captain Shaw
- Start date
Whatever the papers are claiming, it's not yet been revealed when Tennant is leaving.
Agreed.
I do however believe that David will leave the series either at the end of the 2009 specials or at the latest after the 2010 season.
I also reckon it will be a younger actor. I do hope that it isn't and they go for a more mature (age not necessarily personality) doctor.
I guess you missed the quote from Moffat over the weekend saying that there'd never be a Doctor over around 40 again?
No. But since he was 40 and 41 during Doctor Who filming, he wasn't over around 40 either.
And that's a very good thing.
...so he wasn't over/around 40 when he was 40/41? Am I missing something?
Why?
misread a post above. nevermind.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7579332.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7579332.stm
Last edited:
I don't think "Over around 40" means "over/around 40" but, instead, "Over ~40." In other words, 40 years old or thereabouts is the upper limit. So Eccleston qualifies.
No, it's not. That prevents geniuses like Eddie Izzard and Bill Nighy taking a crack at The Doctor, which would be pure brilliance.
Having said that, I understand the age limit. I don't like it, nor do I like hyper nature of the production and presentation, but I understand the practicalities.
Right. Moffat said, "I think he'll always probably tend to be around 40." Eccleston was indeed around 40, as have been Troughton, Tom Baker, Colin Baker, McCoy, McGann, and Tennant.
Christopher Eccleston was 40+ when he became the 9th Doctor, and along with Tom Baker (also in/near 40's I believe) were two of the most historic Docs to make the role their own.
{Edit: Brendan replied ahead of me}
I agree that someone in their 60's shouldn't neccessarily be given the role. However, who has been in their 60's when they obtained the role in the past? Which Doctor?
I understand where the production team is coming from wanting a young-ish Doctor. However, it's a ridiculous step to immediately assume if someone wants an older Doctor, they must want some old grandfatherly figure in their late 50's or 60's. That's nonsense. I know plenty of 40-55 actors that would simply own the role in an non-elderly figure fashion, and it's very limiting (as EMH pointed out) to not consider such talent based on archaic and ageist views.
I would even go so far as to say if they try to get another Tennant-clone (which I can sooo see them doing), the series will start failing. Change or die...
{Edit: Brendan replied ahead of me}
I agree that someone in their 60's shouldn't neccessarily be given the role. However, who has been in their 60's when they obtained the role in the past? Which Doctor?
I understand where the production team is coming from wanting a young-ish Doctor. However, it's a ridiculous step to immediately assume if someone wants an older Doctor, they must want some old grandfatherly figure in their late 50's or 60's. That's nonsense. I know plenty of 40-55 actors that would simply own the role in an non-elderly figure fashion, and it's very limiting (as EMH pointed out) to not consider such talent based on archaic and ageist views.
I would even go so far as to say if they try to get another Tennant-clone (which I can sooo see them doing), the series will start failing. Change or die...
There is nothing remotely ageist about saying that most actors above a certain age can't handle the rigors of the new series' production schedule. (Of course, there are some who could, but the likelihood that one of them would be what the producers are looking for in a new Doctor is even slimmer.) And that's the only reason anyone has given for casting 40ish actors- nothing about who could own the role or playing elderly or playing young or whatever.
Oh, I didn't say there was anything wrong with it. Just that I don't like it. 
I've gotta say, I don't see why Eccleston (who had just turned 41 when he left Doctor Who) would strike people as being particularly older than Tennant (who will be 39 at least when he leaves). Eccleston's Doctor is a bit less manic than Tennant's, but as has been pointed out, that's a function of character personality, not age: 40ish Tom Baker was much more energetic in the role than 30ish Peter Davison.
Similar threads
