Why the lack of Classic characters?
- Thread starter Noddy
- Start date
To be fair it might not have been Moffat's call, this is a man who wrote Time Crash after all, and the Curse of Fatal Death, and much of series 7B which contained a whole heap of references to the classic series and Doctors. You can hardly accuse him of airbrushing the classic era out of existance.
Because "50th anniversary special" is a brand management opportunity, not a content description. Whether Moffat (who once referred to the classic Doctors bar Davison as having "disappeared into a retirement home for lardies" because they couldn't act) wants them in is a moot point: there's a limit to how much classic series material is going to find its way into the new series, even on an occasion like this, because there's a probably-accurate perception that not enough people care about it. If you can devote x amount of screen time to Matt Smith, David Tennant, and John Hurt or to Peter Davison, Katy Manning, and Sophie Aldred, you're going to pick the former.
It still sucks though, IMO. And did they really need John Hurt? He's a good actor, but for this, it would've been so much better if they'd had Paul McGann reprise the role of the Eighth Doctor.
But then if the Hurt Doctor is supposed to have done a "very bad thing" people would have been up in arms that Moffat was tainting a classic character if he'd used McGann instead.
And for all we know Moffat wanted all living docs to be in it and the BBC said "Don't be ridiculous!"
Brendan did Moffat really say that? I recall him definitely saying something along the lines of "There's a reason Davison is the only classic Doctor to have much of a career after Who" and frankly I think he had a point (I also believe he said that a long time ago--as in last century-- also)
And for all we know Moffat wanted all living docs to be in it and the BBC said "Don't be ridiculous!"
Brendan did Moffat really say that? I recall him definitely saying something along the lines of "There's a reason Davison is the only classic Doctor to have much of a career after Who" and frankly I think he had a point (I also believe he said that a long time ago--as in last century-- also)
It was in the In-Vision Season 19 special, in 1995/96: just found a copy, though irritatingly it's a dud one - the first page of the piece is blank, and the quote in question straddles the pages....
"[It's not a coincidence], or some kind of evil plot, that he {Davison]'s played more above the title, lead roles on the telly than the rest of the Doctors put together. It's because- get this! - he's the best actor!"
Last edited:
I think that's the reason exactly for John Hurt. It lets Moffat have a "bad" Doctor without damaging any of the known Doctors. Plus, it's an opportunity to get John Hurt to play the Doctor, and that's no bad thing in itself.
Besides, for dramatic purposes, revealing the existence of an unknown former Doctor is a more interesting cliffhanger than pulling out one of the existing ones. Indeed, this is something which hooks everyone, while using Paul McGann would likely just set off over-excited squees from uber fanboys.
Meanwhile, it's not like the classic era is being completely ignored, since we do have An Adventure in Time and Space. Maybe it's not the same as having all live Doctors in the 50th, but it's better than nothing.
Meanwhile, it's not like the classic era is being completely ignored, since we do have An Adventure in Time and Space. Maybe it's not the same as having all live Doctors in the 50th, but it's better than nothing.
The Moffat quote I had in mind is from this roundtable, which was indeed a long time ago and which Moffat has himself described as "I was drunk in a pub and someone was writing it down," expressing embarrassment in particular about having slagged off Robert Holmes. Whether that's a matter of evolving views or showrunner-Moffat having to be more polite than fan-Moffat... well, one can think as one likes about that. He's certainly one of your more eloquent drunks.
I think Moffat is a huge fan of the classic series, so I'm sure there are other reasons for the lack of classic characters. Undoubtedly the marketability is a major issue. However, it seems very doable to include a classic companion as a supporting character. There were some signs that a classic companion might appear
Mr Awe
Some outside shooting suggested they were filming around Coal Hill School for the anniversary special. A sign showed "I. Chesterton" as the Head Master (IIRC). That doesn't mean he'll appear but it's a possibility.
Mr Awe
Ultimately, until it airs, we don't know what references or nods to the classic series it will show. I don't actually expect any classic Doctors to appear in new clips but before The Name of The Doctor, did anyone expect the clip at th start with all the classic Doctors? I anticipate little nods like this.
Not only was it unexpected, but, that kind of thing has always been "pooh-poohed" around here, because of the difference in quality of the film clips, "They'll never insert older clips, or insert new actors into older clips, because it would look awful in today's HD"
I didn't think it looked especially great, particularly the footage with Hartnell. That said, for what it was it was tolerable. Not great (on a technical level), but tolerable.
^ Let's face it, classic Doctor Who rarely excelled on a technical level.
^ That's true. 
Oh, sure, it didn't look great at all, but, they knew most of us would understand and accept the disparity, and actually, in some cases, the newer insert was degraded in quality so it looked less bad.
Similar threads
