^And have silly facial hair.
WHY
- Thread starter James Wright
- Start date
^ Anthony Hopkins for the next Master, just to really confuse us all!
^ I was thinking of his Zorro; but yes, a cannibalistic Master works too.
^He'd probably have to be called Ron-Anal or something.
Well Sydney Newmen was all for the Doctor being played by a woman.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...w-Doctor-Who-nearly-became-the-Time-Lady.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...w-Doctor-Who-nearly-became-the-Time-Lady.html
Does this mean that maybe Donna really was a Time Lord!
She might be a little too up there in years now but I think Helen Mirren could be a great Doctor.
Really a silly notion anyway.
Does this mean that maybe Donna really was a Time Lord!
She might be a little too up there in years now but I think Helen Mirren could be a great Doctor.
Really a silly notion anyway.
As it happens, Helen Mirren is playing the gender-switched role of "Prospera" in a new film version of Shakespeare's The Tempest.
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcnOHJlo3oM&hd=1[/yt]
I've been reading this thread just to see if anyone can come up with a good reason why the Doctor shouldn't be female. So far, bubkis. Alienating a narrow-minded fanbase is not a good reason. Neither is "because it's always been that way, waa waa waa." 
The argument that "there's no reason to do it" is equally invalid. Presumably the writers wouldn't do it unless they'd come up with a good reason, so that's simply a given assumption.
Ubik is definitely winning this debate. Oh yeah, and this is a good response too:
Keep going, this is interesting.
The argument that "there's no reason to do it" is equally invalid. Presumably the writers wouldn't do it unless they'd come up with a good reason, so that's simply a given assumption.Ubik is definitely winning this debate. Oh yeah, and this is a good response too:
That's the closest anyone has come to a reasonable excuse, but I think even children are a bit more flexible and open-minded than that. They might be more flexible and open-minded than the adults that presume they are protecting the poor little tykes from something or other, not sure exactly what...
Keep going, this is interesting.
You know, I wonder if they'd ever considered making the Master female. I actually think that might work better than bringing the Rani back, since she was an obscure character saddled with bad scripts. The Master doesn't play by the same rules the Doctor does, and some of his incarnations haven't been fully time lord.
Has anybody mentioned that the Eleventh Doctor, due to his longer hair, thought he was a girl until he checked his adam's apple?
Anyway, there is one factor one has to consider: Merchandising. Figures of the female characters from the show, mainly the companions-do not sell from what I've read. Hence why we only had two Roses, Marthas, and one Donna, I think, and why the Sarah Jane line was discontinued.
Has anybody mentioned that the Eleventh Doctor, due to his longer hair, thought he was a girl until he checked his adam's apple?
Anyway, there is one factor one has to consider: Merchandising. Figures of the female characters from the show, mainly the companions-do not sell from what I've read. Hence why we only had two Roses, Marthas, and one Donna, I think, and why the Sarah Jane line was discontinued.
I've been reading this thread just to see if anyone can come up with a good reason why the Doctor shouldn't be female. So far, bubkis. Alienating a narrow-minded fanbase is not a good reason. Neither is "because it's always been that way, waa waa waa."
I note that you haven't detected a good reason why they should make him a female.
I've been reading this thread just to see if anyone can come up with a good reason why the Doctor shouldn't be female. So far, bubkis. Alienating a narrow-minded fanbase is not a good reason. Neither is "because it's always been that way, waa waa waa."
I note that you haven't detected a good reason why they should make him a female.
Don't expect any. The bias is as obvious as the idea of making The Doctor a woman is silly. The day the makers of Doctor Who run out of ideas and start gimmick sex changes is the day I'm done with the show. Go watch Buffy and read Wonder Woman if you need an estrogen fix...
^I'm with you. I was merely pointing out the fact that gloating at 'a narrow-minded fanbase' seemed to be the only reason the quoted poster could come up with for changing the Doctor's gender.
In storytelling, you never need a reason to do something other than, "It's never been done before. Let's see what happens." It's up to the "no's" to offer a reason why NOT. And, it's true - there has been no substantial reason given. "It's silly" is not a reason. The idea of regeneration is silly. So are monsters in rubber suits, and jelly babies.
If they can recast the gender of a Shakespeare character hundreds of years old (Prospero), then I'm sure the character of the Doctor, who is much less sacred than a Shakespeare character, could survive the gender switch.
The main reason, by the way, that I feel the gender switch in Doctor Who would be a great idea is because it would open many avenues to new stories that the series has never told before. The show, even the new one, has become entirely too formulaic, telling the same stories, the same way, over and over again. A gender switch (not to mention bringing on a few more female writers) would offer a point of view on the show that, over 45 years, it has never had before. It would be NEW. Isn't that a damn good reason to do ANYTHING, in a show that is over 45 years old? At this point, anything new, within reason, would be good.
They aren't recasting Prospero. Each production of The Tempest is a complete separate self-contained thing so the Prospero that Patrick Stewart played is different from the one Helen Mirren is different from the one someone else will play next year in a community theater production.
Asking "why not" is usually the best way to the right answer, but it can be turned around just as easily to ask "Why not keep him the gender he has always been?" Really, in this case, there is no better choice between the two. They're both equally valid opinions, one is just steeped in the tradition of the character while the other is revolutionary. I personally don't see how making The Doctor a woman would somehow allow them to tell better stories, and since I tend to think of his core personality as essentially masculine I can't really see why someone would want to bring in a woman.
To each their own, stop being douchey to each other.
Asking "why not" is usually the best way to the right answer, but it can be turned around just as easily to ask "Why not keep him the gender he has always been?" Really, in this case, there is no better choice between the two. They're both equally valid opinions, one is just steeped in the tradition of the character while the other is revolutionary. I personally don't see how making The Doctor a woman would somehow allow them to tell better stories, and since I tend to think of his core personality as essentially masculine I can't really see why someone would want to bring in a woman.
To each their own, stop being douchey to each other.
A friend of mine sent me the link to an interesting little tidbit (and wouldn't you know, it involved the original creator of the show as well as Michael Grade?)
Suffice to say, evidently the idea of a female Doctor actually was given consideration back in the 1980's.
Suffice to say, evidently the idea of a female Doctor actually was given consideration back in the 1980's.
The Doctor's never been a serial killer before, so should we go down the Dexter route?
Oh yes, and more female writers, why not? If they're good enough they should write for Who as well. Just so long as you don't hire them principally because they're women I have no issue at all!!
Same with the Doctor, if there was a woman out there who could play the Doctor and was the best person at the time then hire them, but just going out of your way to make the Doctor a woman for some notion of equality...quick way to wind the show down, because whoever she is she has to be bloody brilliant or she won't be accepted. Look at the who-ha
over smith because he was a young whippersnapper? Imagine that tenfold.
Oh yes, and more female writers, why not? If they're good enough they should write for Who as well. Just so long as you don't hire them principally because they're women I have no issue at all!!
Same with the Doctor, if there was a woman out there who could play the Doctor and was the best person at the time then hire them, but just going out of your way to make the Doctor a woman for some notion of equality...quick way to wind the show down, because whoever she is she has to be bloody brilliant or she won't be accepted. Look at the who-ha
over smith because he was a young whippersnapper? Imagine that tenfold.
Which was posted yesterday, by DWF in this same thread, only 10 posts before yours.
Similar threads
