I’ve been a Doctor Who fan since watching Tom Baker on PBS in the 80s. Chibnal’s run wasn’t perfect but it was nice change from Moffatt. RTD did a great job of reinventing the series but I am very wary of his return. I can’t stand Murray Gold’s music so his return has me even more apprehensive. It really feels like it could be a slide backwards. Doctor Who has always been about change and this makes me feel like it is a safe move. I hope I’m wrong.
“Child-like” and “Childish” are two very different things.
You’re the first one to mention “childish,” and pointlessly bring it up like some kind of petulant, oh, what’s the word… 
2 Likes
I’m also a fan that’s followed the show since the 80s. I am hopeful that RTD can pull in the right folks to progress the series. He’s made some interesting casting choices like hiring my hometown hero, Jinkx Monsoon to play a villain in the upcoming series. Looking forward to seeing how he resolves the return of Tennant–hoping it is artfully done. Excited to see Gatwa’s take on the Doctor–he was a standout on Sex Education so I think he’ll be great.
I liked a lot of Chibnal’s run, he introduced some interesting ideas–just didn’t always deliver on them in a way I found satisfying. The Flux season had a lot of ambitious ideas, some that totally rewrote the character of the Doctor, but overall arc was a bit of a mess and the resolution seemed to leave a lot up in the air. Despite that it produced one of the best Sontaran stories ever. Would have liked to see more of 13 with a different set of writers, so fingers crossed Whittaker signs on to do some audio adventures.
1 Like
But the writers made this 1,200 year old a wide-eyed child-like character which really rubbed me the wrong way.
No one said childish here, except you. Here is how you referred to Whittaker’s Doctor. Originally, you said “child-like” and there is evidence of other doctors having that quality. You may not agree, but to pretend like every other doctor was super-serious and full of gravitas is just retconning nonsense…
2 Likes
Wasn’t Hartnell serious and old? Him, don’t know if any of the others were humourless oulfelllas. Most of them were comedic actors to some extent. Pertwee, Baker, Davison, Baker, McCoy, McGann, okay Hurt was fairly humourless (in the radio show I heard the war doctor in) and a serious actor, as is Ecclestone though his portrayal was impish and funny etc. etc. etc.
In short apart from some special one offs the original Doctor being a humourless, old, git was precisely what drove them to change personalities with the regenerations…
My POINT was Whittaker was not the only Doctor with “child-like” qualities. I didn’t say they were ALL silly or all serious. 
1 Like
I’d really love to know this. I haven’t looked into it so I don’t know what she’s said but onscreen she looked like she was having so much fun and that made her a really great Doctor. There was always a sense that, even with really high stakes, she still was in it just for the adventure.
Her sense of fun and wonder are why I wish there’d been more focus on her instead of some of the other characters.
1 Like
Sorry my point was they pretty much all did, as they really hated the one time they didn’t lean into that so I fully expect that to continue. It’s the actual role these days. Whittaker is the norm in that, not the outlier.
If I were picking someone who really leant into the childlike etc. it might be Smith that I’d pick.
1 Like
Agreed.
1 Like
She’s my favourite. There was a joy in her version, she was someone that wanted other people to be something better. I agree, she looked to be enjoying herself a lot, and she did a little Dr Who skit online at the beginning of the pandemic to make kids feel safe - how can you not love that?
Remember that episode where David Tennant said "Well… " or that one where he said "“I’m sorry… ?” I genuinely like him, but that was some shitty writing, again and again! I’m not going to tell anyone they’re wrong for liking him, though, he had some great episodes too. It was fun, that’s the whole point, right?
Still, it’s arguable that for the first time in decades male watchers couldn’t picture themselves as The Doctor and they were left to be assistants. I’m fairly sure that’s why a lot of guys say Jodie is “bad.” It wasn’t “their” show anymore.
7 Likes
That never occurred to me, I thought she was very relatable!
I mean we can picture ourselves or relate to love songs from different sex and gender perspectives, fiction is for me at least about empathising with things that I don’t necessarily have direct experience of. It expands us. Makes us humans, as the Tardis said, bigger on the inside.
4 Likes
Many people can empathise with others. Unfortunately, those that can’t tend to be the most vocal, especially about things like TV shows 
5 Likes
It’s tiresome. Utterly tiresome.
I saw some online chat about the wonderful Sarah Pollen’s film Women Talking and it’s just so long past time we move past that nonsense. (FWIW my major criticism of the film is that it places too much weight on a man’s voice. It doesn’t work in context for me.)
Haters gonna hate.
1 Like
4 Likes
It seems to be BBC policy that every Doctor gets four years (or that’s what they told Matt Smith and Peter Capaldi anyway)
If the actors want to leave to avoid being typecast, more power to them, but that being BBC policy makes the show feel a bit too cynically manufactured in my opinion. Besides which, Whittaker didn’t get as many episodes during those years as her predecessors. David Tennant got 39 normal episodes and 8 specials during his run (and now he’s back for more), compared to Jodie Whittaker’s 26 episodes and 5 specials. Even Peter Capaldi had 36 episodes and 4 specials. That’s a pretty big difference.
I don’t know how it works in the UK, but for instance on Star Trek the reason every show lasts 7 years is that’s how long the actors’ contracts run—after that they could demand more money
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
