Very nice to have a nod to MG toymaker.
Russell T. Davies Returns to Doctor Who as New Showrunner
- Thread starter Allyn Gibson
- Start date
Very nice to have a nod to MG toymaker.
Well, on the plus side, it’ll fend off claims that they’re too Disneyfied.
In what will undoubtedly annoy and disappoint certain fans, Davies told SFX Magazine (as reported by io9) that he has no intention of retconning the Timeless Child origin:
“Let’s stare that question right in the eye. I’m not going to unwrite my good friend Chris Chibnall’s work on ‘The Timeless Children,’” Davies told SFX magazine in a new interview. “I’m not going to deny what he wrote. I’m going with it. It’s absolutely fine.”
Even if the first five minutes of "The Star Beast" were a montage sequence that comprehensively and explicitly retconned the Timeless Child storyline, I wouldn't expect Davies to say anything different.
I'm sure Chris Chibnall would've said the same thing about, for instance, not unwriting or denying anything Davies or Moffat wrote about destroying and/or rescuring Gallifrey and how it affects the Doctor. And, from a certain point of view, he didn't. It's not like he said "The End of Time" or "The Day of the Doctor" never happened, he just rendered those storylines and character developments inert in the current context.
Just like a future writer revealing the Timeless Child was actually the Master (or was made up entirely) wouldn't change that the Doctor had once been convinced that she was on her ten millionth regeneration and that everything she thought she knew about how Time Lords work in any sense was completely wrong.
I'm sure Chris Chibnall would've said the same thing about, for instance, not unwriting or denying anything Davies or Moffat wrote about destroying and/or rescuring Gallifrey and how it affects the Doctor. And, from a certain point of view, he didn't. It's not like he said "The End of Time" or "The Day of the Doctor" never happened, he just rendered those storylines and character developments inert in the current context.
Just like a future writer revealing the Timeless Child was actually the Master (or was made up entirely) wouldn't change that the Doctor had once been convinced that she was on her ten millionth regeneration and that everything she thought she knew about how Time Lords work in any sense was completely wrong.
It's not like being the Timeless Child really impacts things. The Doctor can't really remember anything pre-Hartnell. So what matters and shapes the Doctor now is that they stole a Tardis and ran away, had and lost a family, fought the Time War, married River Song, and whatever other events have shaped them from 1963 onward. At the end of the day the Doctor is still just a traveller having adventures and righting wrongs along the way.
The franchise doesn't work that way.
Doctor Who creators can acknowledge or ignore - publicly or otherwise - anything from the 60-year history of the program that they want to.
I wonder if we ever finally get someone on the show who didn't start with the old series if they'll finally move on from trying to add their own stamp to the Doctor's past. Maybe I'm the only one who doesn't care at all about his origins. Just give me a madman in a box and clever adventures.
What does that have to do with what they said?
RTD is/was not under any obligation to make any statements about maintaining fidelity to what Chibnall did in introducing the concept of the Timeless Child as an origin story for The Doctor, nor is/was he under any obligation to maintain said fidelity.
If he wanted to ignore, retcon, or undo The Doctor being the Timeless Child, there is nothing to stop him from doing so and/or being open and upfront about it publicly.
Welcome to your AI-generated nightmare future:
https://usnewsper.com/2023/11/docto...erse/?feed_id=142780&_unique_id=654648c954e69
https://usnewsper.com/2023/11/docto...erse/?feed_id=142780&_unique_id=654648c954e69
Why would he want to ignore it though?
Bingo!....and i am sure the BBC did not bring RTD back so he could continue down the Chibnall route, that is a hole they want to get the show out of, hence why RTD is back, and judging from the trailers he is going to do it with ease.
Bingo!....and i am sure the BBC did not bring RTD back so he could continue down the Chibnall route, that is a hole they want to get the show out of, hence why RTD is back, and judging from the trailers he is going to do it with ease.
And yet Jo Martin is still right there on every piece of merchandise that features all the Doctors, including all the 60th Anniversary stuff that Russell would have signed off on.
Plus
the leaked Christmas Special synopsis, that has so far proved accurate in multiple respects, has the Doctor telling Ruby about discovering his past was not what he thought it was as a way of empathisng with her when she discovers the same about herself.
Last edited:
Why would he, why wouldn't he ... well, he doesn't have to ignore it, I suppose. I can't imagine what would motivate him to revisit it. It doesn't seem likely.
I take his comments as a diplomatic doff of the hat to Chibnall, nothing more. He was asked and said he had no intention of "unwriting" it, which would be an explicit retcon of Chibnall's retcon. The Timeless Child could never be brought up in the new RTD era and there would be no contradiction to his statement, is all.
This might be my own personal lack of interest talking but I'd like to see the upcoming specials as a bit of a bridge between what came before and then to launch into the Ncuti Gatwa era with as little baggage as possible. I really think the new series could be a chance to bring a new set of viewers to Who and to make it as easy as possible to jump on. The first "nuWho" episodes were 18 years ago! I would leave behind as much baggage as possible and try to use the Disney thing to engage the next generation of viewers.
I think they’re in agreement with you - I’m guessing that’s why they’re referring to it as Season 1.
You're missing the point. RTD is under zero obligation to be diplomatic because Doctor Who is the only IP in existence that doesn't have a Canon, which makes anyone who works on it therefore unbeholden to anything that has ever been done with it.
It’s already clear that 2024 isn’t going to be a continuity clean slate on the level of 2005; Kate Stewart, Mel, and Rose Noble, all of whom are confirmed to be in the series as well as the anniversary specials, are bigger nods to the past than anything in Eccleston’s first series.
The Timeless Child isn’t going to be mentioned any more often than any other fundamentally resolved plot point from a prior season like the Time War or the Hybrid or whatever, but there’s no reason other than fan wishfulness to think it’s in some kind of special quasi-disregarded category.
The Timeless Child isn’t going to be mentioned any more often than any other fundamentally resolved plot point from a prior season like the Time War or the Hybrid or whatever, but there’s no reason other than fan wishfulness to think it’s in some kind of special quasi-disregarded category.
Ah, I missed that, I "skim" DW news a bit so as not to get overly spoiled.
