What, or rather Who you won't be seeing in November

[StCoop]

http://www.doctorwhotv.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/dwm-465.jpg

Looking at that really does make all questions of being too old or too fat pretty ridiculous. It could have been fantastic.

 

[Sindatur]

They look great, every one of them is very recognizable.

Is Tom wearing a wig? I thought he was as balding as Colin?

 

[The Nth Doctor]

No, that's Tom's natural hair.

Fantastic cover and I want to check out that issue. Is there any way to order just one magazine instead of a whole subscription?

 

[Brendan Moody]

Some American bookstores carry DWM-- I know Borders did when it was still around-- and I think a local comic shop could order you a single issue.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

Yeah, but I'm living in Brussels now. The only English bookstore that I've found so far that carries magazines doesn't carry Doctor Who Magazine (at least when I've been there).

 

[Takeru]

Have you checked the train station? In Germany all train stations (maybe not in tiny cities) have stores that sell english books, newspapers and magazines, maybe belgian ones do the same? Even if they don't have DWM you could ask if they order it for you.

To be brutally honest, seeing that cover I'm almost glad the old Doctor's aren't in the special. Paul McGann is the only one who can still pull it off, the others are way to old to believably play their respective Doctors before their regenerations and I'm not interested in timey wimey "That's why we look older" explanations.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

I'll take a closer look this weekend. When is this issue is suppose to hit the book stands?

 

[sidious618]

I don't think there needs to be an explanation as to why they look older. The audience knows the actors are older and will go with it.

 

[Tom]

It's a wasted opportunity by the BBC, you have 5 classic doctors that all seem to get along well with each other, that would have really translated well on film, IMO. Yes they are old but anything can be explained on Doctor Who.

 

[Noddy]

I'm appalled at the prospect that none of them will even have cameos.

 

[StCoop]

If people can summon up the suspension of disbelief to watch a series about a man with a magic box that travels in time and space they could have gone along with whatever reason the story delivered for their current appearances.

It's not like many of them will still be here for the 75th anniversary.

 

[Mr Awe]

^ Seriously! And these human actors for crying out loud.

 

[Tom]

The 20th century gets no respect!! LOL

 

[StCoop]

^ Seriously! And these human actors for crying out loud.

The most insulting thing is the idea that, for example, having some random woman wearing Tom Baker's scarf in the epsiode is a worthy substitute for actually having Baker appear.

 

[Cutter John]

Idiots at the BBC are really dropping the ball on the 50th.

 

[Marc]

Idiots at the BBC are really dropping the ball on the 50th.

or they don't want a repeat of the cluttered mess that was the 5 doctors.

Imagine trying to fit seven doctors in unless you went for simple cameos of Doctors 4 - 8.

 

[Tom]

Idiots at the BBC are really dropping the ball on the 50th.

or they don't want a repeat of the cluttered mess that was the 5 doctors.

Imagine trying to fit seven doctors in unless you went for simple cameos of Doctors 4 - 8.

The cluttered mess is only how the writers handle it, NOT the fact that there are multiple doctors. It comes down to screen time and how it is handled in the plot.

 

[Mr Awe]

Idiots at the BBC are really dropping the ball on the 50th.

or they don't want a repeat of the cluttered mess that was the 5 doctors.

Imagine trying to fit seven doctors in unless you went for simple cameos of Doctors 4 - 8.

Sorry, but the Five Doctors is a fine, fun story. And, who says you need to get all of the classic Doctors in?

Or maybe they should've thought bigger/more epic and do a multi-part anniversary special to fit in more?

It just reflects small thinking on the BBC's part. Imagine if they had tried to think big?

Mr Awe

 

[Allyn Gibson]

I'm going to voice an unpopular opinion here.

I simply don't care that the pre-2006 Doctors are not part of the anniversary special. I don't know who decided not to involve them, but it doesn't matter; whoever made the decision had their reasons. Still, we don't need a parade of actors who once essayed the role to make a special that celebrates a half-century of Doctor Who.

 

[Sindatur]

Idiots at the BBC are really dropping the ball on the 50th.

or they don't want a repeat of the cluttered mess that was the 5 doctors.

Imagine trying to fit seven doctors in unless you went for simple cameos of Doctors 4 - 8.

Eh, I love the Five Doctors, and don't think it's a cluttered mess at all with 4 Doctors and their companions running around together.

I do believe 7, is too much, especially for only 75 minutes of screentime. My hope was, that it could be a Multi-episode story. I think it would've been pretty awesome to have one Doctor per episode with the Current Doctor for 6 episodes (Or maybe 2 for 3 episodes) and then a two-parter with all of them to bring it all together.