I’m so glad they ‘resurrected’ McGann. That part in the War Doctor episodes really made it for me. The continuity was nice as well, but he turned out a pretty great Doctor!
I’m ready for a 5 Doctors, how about you?
3 Likes
Whittaker, Capaldi, Smith, Tennant, McGann? Yeah, that could work, if McGann was willing to do a longer role. Hopefully he liked his “Night of the Doctor” wig better than the TV movie one.
Speaking of Big Finish, they did McGann, McCoy, C. Baker, Davison, T. Baker for the 50th anniversary that was pretty good.
3 Likes
I’ll probably take fire for this but there is in fact a part of me that despite really liking the female leads in lots of the SF books I read, remains really hesitant about celebrating sex switching established characters just for the sake of doing so.
I can’t argue with the in world universe logic because the whole Doctor Who universe is perfectly suited to constant retcons and rewrites within broad limits so regenerating as a woman doesn’t break any show rules as I understand. But still there remains a part of me that questions this casting decision not for the actress herself but it just seems a bit of a retcon too far. As before I’ll give it a shot anyway.
Surely this makes me a misogynist in the eyes of some…
If you’re inviting criticism, it’s the assumption “just for the sake of doing so” that seems to irk you, not what direction they went in. So no, you don’t sound like a misogynist, you sound envious.
I am not inviting counter criticism. thanks!
What do you like about Doctor Who?
Here are some previews for Colin Baker stories:
BF006 - The Marian Conspiracy
BF011 - The Apocalypse Element
BF035 - …ish
BF048 - Davros
BF126 - Blue Forgotten Planet
BF182 - Antidote to Oblivion
I dont undertand. I have no personal desire to be on the show and don’t follow enough British TV or cinema to have any other person there get the role. What could I envy here?
Well the basic premise was what got me watching as a kid during the Tom Baker era and what got me back during Eccleston.The character as a hero who isn’t super, who (for the most part) solves situations with reasoning rather than weapons blazing. How the character though completely in-human seems to have a strange affinity for the fate of humanity anyhow.
As a kid I liked the established baddies but as an adult I’ve grown bored of the Daleks, Cybermen, etc.
Yet the person who created the the Doctor was looking at female actors 30 years ago (Joanna Lumley, Dawn French and Frances de la Tour), after Colin Baker left the role . He was overruled by people who didn’t care about the show.
I’ll take that as Word of God is that the Doctor can be a woman sometimes. (apologies for the TVTropes link)
6 Likes
What might have happened is one thing, what actually happens is another. And in any case I already said I don’t see this as an issue with in world show logic so that bit of history doesn’t change anything though interesting on its own.
It rather sheds some light on “just for the sake of it”.
It’s 50 years of arbitrary things. I can’t explain any one of them. Ask the writers. They can change literally anything!
I don’t know if there is a “show bible” for Doctor Who, but yeah I recognized this already.
I have to confess that I’m not totally happy about it.
The thing is, like I said before, there are a million white guys on TV, but there are precious few who solve things with wits and communication instead of firearms. I really hate to lose one of them because honestly, having been raised by a single mom with no real male influences until I was pretty much an adult, “positive male role models” is kind of a big deal for me.
It’s not that I have a problem with gender swapping characters in general, it’s just that I have a specific half dozen or so that I really value specifically because they are men who are adventure heroes that don’t fit the alpha male template: Daniel Jackson (Stargate), The Doctor, Jean-Luc Picard (Trek tNG), MacGyver, Newt Scamander (Harry Potterverse), and while maybe not the most positive role model, Dr Frank N Furter (Rocky Horror). My entire takeaway from these characters was that you can be smart and empathetic and not want to solve everything with fists and just maybe possibly wear fishnets and heels on occasion and still be a man.
I mean, I was an artsy science geek raised by women. I didn’t play sports or give a shit about cars. There was nothing about athletes that I could identify with, and while I’d by lying if I said that the shoot first, Mel Gibson in Payback kind of character didn’t resonate with me, even at an early age, I knew I didn’t like the part of me it resonated with. But MacGyver? Hell yeah. That was someone I looked at as a kid and felt like I could grow up to be like.
So I’m kind of touchy and protective of those rare roles that say “this is ALSO what a man looks like”.
I absolutely loved the new Ghostbusters. Starbuck was so much better as a woman. Literally any other role, I’m totally happy to see recast as female- It’s just that small handful that are so important to me because they’re atypical male roles that I feel are really important as is. This is especially true if there’s a way to expand, rather than recast the role- Like adding May Parker and Spider-Gwen to Spider Man, introducing more female Starfleet Captains (Janeway is my honest to Roddenberry favorite), or say bringing back Romana or Jenny to Who.
I mean, I’m not so upset about it that I’m going to boycott the show or bitch and whine for her entire run or go off on some misogynistic rant- People have said great things about her past roles, so I have no reason to believe she won’t be good. I’m really excited to see what she does with the character, and I think this opens up ALL KINDS of new storytelling possibilities as far as character development goes. I’m genuinely looking forward to watching.
And I’m happy for female viewers who have been waiting for this- But much happier for my trans friends. This is kind of an even bigger moment for them. I get that they’re now able to relate to the character in a whole new way.
But at the same time, that also negates a big part of how I relate to the character. I can’t help feeling like their gain is my loss. I can accept that maybe it’s a little selfish, and It’s not so big of a loss that I’m going to get all butthurt over it, but I do think that it’s just big enough that maybe I’d like to have someone acknowledge it without just claiming that I’m motivated by pure misogyny.
1 Like
I don’t see you stomping your feet and proclaiming that having a woman in the role “ruined” the show for you, so I don’t think so. I disagree about it being “just because” but I don’t think your view is necessarily misogynistic.
Of course she could have been the best person who tried out for the role, as far as the show runner was concerned. Chibnall worked with her in Broadchurch already, so it might also had been a case of putting someone he knew could do the job in the role. But of course, we’d have to hear him on the issue.
Right? 50 years of a white dude in the role is itself an arbitrary thing.
3 Likes
There has to be - there is so much history there to keep track of, someone has to have a way to keep track of continuities.
5 Likes
The last human in the galaxy was nothing but a sheet of skin but, yeah, a woman doctor is outrageous. /s
5 Likes
The husband was quite upset about that rumor.
Jenny’s coming back!
Big Finish’s stories are wonderful. They use original cast members whenever possible, and cast the other voice actors extremely well. They also act as that Doctor Who Bible, filling in all the canon we didn’t/don’t see in the show.
4 Likes
Not in mine. You and @MikeTheBard are just selfish, and that’s fine. We’re all selfish about shows we love - we want the showrunners to do what WE want, and that’s really just silly, but so human…
…for example, don’t get me started about Clara.
3 Likes
Well there would be if anyone was that bothered with actually keeping track, but… well by and large, the Doctor Who approach to continuity has revolved around not really caring if things are consistent. For example, the daleks in “Genesis of the Daleks” can’t be destroyed by pushing them into a coat, whereas the original daleks in “Daleks” absolutely could be, in spite of that story being set later on. Usually if an item or person touches their future/past self, there’s a large energy discharge… except that one time when flying space monkeys showed up to eat everything instead. And except when the Doctor touches one of his other regenerations. That doesn’t count. … Because reasons. Atlantis exists, everyone agrees on that, but there’s a three way disagreement as to how it was actually destroyed, and the Doctor is half human, on his mother’s side, but only when he’s Paul McGann, and even then, only once.
4 Likes
