# Doctor Who Series 12 (modern era)



## danny la rouge (Oct 19, 2019)

I don’t think there’s a thread for the forthcoming series with Jodie Whittaker in the title role. 

It seems we might not have to wait until 2020 to see the Doctor again, though.

Doctor Who Series 12: news on a special


----------



## Detroit City (Oct 19, 2019)

is this the new girl Dr.?  can we have a pic?


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 19, 2019)

Detroit City said:


> is this the new girl Dr.?  can we have a pic?


She’s already done a series and a special, so she’s not new any more. And I’m not that keen on the “girl Dr” description. 

But there’s a pic in the link:


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 19, 2019)

ooh is it an xmas special or are they doing it on new years day again. Prefer xmas.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 19, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> ooh is it an xmas special or are they doing it on new years day again. Prefer xmas.


 Not yet known. I prefer it at Christmas too. New Year is busier for me.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 19, 2019)

'*There is no information* on the CV about what kind of _Doctor Who_ special it will be, the name of the director, or *when it will air* but this is the first positive proof of a special.'

fingers crossed for chrimble


----------



## Detroit City (Oct 19, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> She’s already done a series and a special, so she’s not new any more. And I’m not that keen on the “girl Dr” description.
> 
> But there’s a pic in the link:


sorry I meant "lady doctor"....but thanks for the pic.  she does look like a Dr.


----------



## Santino (Oct 19, 2019)

Might be a pointless 5 minute teaser thing. Like they did with Capaldi and Bill.


----------



## Epona (Oct 19, 2019)

Detroit City said:


> sorry I meant "lady doctor"....but thanks for the pic.  she does look like a Dr.



You could just say "The Doctor".  The thing has been going since 1963 and no-one referred to any of the previous as "Boy Doctor" or "Man Doctor"


----------



## Santino (Oct 19, 2019)

Santino said:


> Might be a pointless 5 minute teaser thing. Like they did with Capaldi and Bill.


Or some Children In Need nonsense.


----------



## spanglechick (Oct 19, 2019)

Epona said:


> You could just say "The Doctor".  The thing has been going since 1963 and no-one referred to any of the previous as "Boy Doctor" or "Man Doctor"


Or “gentleman doctor”, which is the direct equivalent to “lady”.


----------



## Epona (Oct 19, 2019)

spanglechick said:


> Or “gentleman doctor”, which is the direct equivalent to “lady”.



The "lady" was an amendment to originally referring to "girl-doctor" however


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 20, 2019)

the non cis-male doctor.


----------



## ginger_syn (Oct 21, 2019)

Just the doctor. I will be happy with a new year special but I really want a christmas one.


----------



## D'wards (Nov 23, 2019)




----------



## ginger_syn (Nov 23, 2019)




----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 24, 2019)

D'wards said:


>




Gods, that looks great fun. I've only seen the first ep with JW & I just don't get the hate for the show, thought she was brilliant. I hope one of the streaming services will pick up the show. I don't think I've missed a season since the 70s!


----------



## ginger_syn (Nov 24, 2019)

Most reasoably rational fans don't hate her thankfully, sadly the loons are loud and persitant though wrong. I mainly swing between exasperation and laughter when on gb these days, while comforting myself with the blu ray of series 11 ,thoughts of series 12 and the enjoyment of heads exploding because chris cibnall is writing series 13 intead of unravelling from the stress.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 30, 2019)

Not long to wait now.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 1, 2020)

Happy new Doctor who day.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 1, 2020)

Only an hour to go now.


----------



## Detroit City (Jan 1, 2020)

I think its on tonight at either 8pm or 9pm Eastern time on BBC America...can't wait.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 1, 2020)

Well. That went to all sorts of places, didn't it? Genuinely strange and menacing aliens, genuine peril and a hell of a reveal at the end.

Also, perhaps because I haven't seen him in anything for a while, I kept thinking "The tech guy looks awfie like a young Lenny Henry". Imagine my surprise when the credits rolled. Lenny's looking good these days!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 1, 2020)

That was fucking brilliant. 

Loved the comedy spoof element of the Bond films. 

And having both Lenny Henry and Stephen Fry in it.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 1, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Loved the comedy spoof element of James Bond.



The Doctor being really, really bad at cards


----------



## CNT36 (Jan 1, 2020)

That was a decent enough start to the series. It's a long time since there has been a satisfying conclusion to a two parter though.


----------



## magneze (Jan 1, 2020)

That was good.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 1, 2020)

Enjoyed that, funny and a bit creepy.


----------



## Santino (Jan 1, 2020)

I was delighted that the Master turned up, and without being leaked in advance.

eta: The new Master really sounded like John Simm at times.


----------



## spanglechick (Jan 1, 2020)

Santino said:


> I was delighted that the Master turned up, and without being leaked in advance.
> 
> eta: The new Master really sounded like John Simm at times.


And a little bit like Missy, too (the wizard of oz reference).


----------



## CNT36 (Jan 2, 2020)

Santino said:


> I was delighted that the Master turned up, and without being leaked in advance.
> 
> eta: The new Master really sounded like John Simm at times.


Possibly in disguise. Again.


----------



## fieryjack (Jan 2, 2020)

well enough put together but, IMO, Jodie Whittaker's characterisation is still awful


----------



## CNT36 (Jan 2, 2020)

fieryjack said:


> well enough put together but, IMO, Jodie Whittaker's characterisation is still awful


It's ok. I believe she's the Doctor definitely the same person as Smith or Tennant but find the writers sometimes let her down. The Master mentioning her being a man worked for me but the bit with Stephen Fry just pulled me out of the whole thing. I think it was the line about the file.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 2, 2020)

I found that funny and so did the grandkids who enjoyed it though i think grandson enjoed it more than eldest granddaughter.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 2, 2020)

CNT36 said:


> It's ok. but the bit with Stephen Fry just pulled me out of the whole thing. I think it was the line about the file.


What was that bit?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 2, 2020)

That was good, felt very tight and I did not see the master coming. Nice to see the classic tissue compression weapon getting a mention here. I'll give the story a score out of ten after pt 2 but so far a big thumbs up


----------



## Helen Back (Jan 3, 2020)

I see Urban has redecorated. I don't like it.


----------



## Helen Back (Jan 4, 2020)

Sacha Dhawan (O / The Master) was in An Adventure in Space and Time as Waris Hussein, the original director of Dr.Who.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 4, 2020)

Currently watching the Doctor battle aliens in Attack the Block. 👾


----------



## spanglechick (Jan 4, 2020)

Helen Back said:


> Sacha Dhawan (O / The Master) was in An Adventure in Space and Time as Waris Hussein, the original director of Dr.Who.


And was the doctor in the second episode of Dracula last night.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 4, 2020)

Helen Back said:


> Sacha Dhawan (O / The Master) was in An Adventure in Space and Time as Waris Hussein, the original director of Dr.Who.


He was apparently second choice for the new doctor, and is a massive fan boy. Probably a bit sad that he can now never be the doctor.


----------



## FiFi (Jan 4, 2020)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> He was apparently second choice for the new doctor, and is a massive fan boy. Probably a bit sad that he can now never be the doctor.


But he will, forever, be one of the equally select band of actors who have been "the Master".


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 4, 2020)

Meh.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 4, 2020)

Helen Back said:


> Sacha Dhawan (O / The Master) was in An Adventure in Space and Time as Waris Hussein, the original director of Dr.Who.



Ha, thanks for that I was struggling to place him.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 4, 2020)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> He was apparently second choice for the new doctor, and is a massive fan boy. Probably a bit sad that he can now never be the doctor.



Maybe not. Colin Baker played a bad guy and later became no 6, Capaldi too, iirc


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 4, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Maybe not. Colin Baker played a bad guy and later became no 6, Capaldi too, iirc


Well yeah, but the master is a bit of a bigger deal. 

That David Tennant assistant Martha was in it before as someone else and was turned into a Cyberman before the actor came back.
Also the lalla ward was princess astra before becoming Romana (though she says she chose to look like princess astra).


----------



## Santino (Jan 4, 2020)

The Master could steal the Doctor's body, and the Doctor has to use the Master's body but gets trapped in it for two series before regenerating.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 4, 2020)

The master steals bodies by killing them.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 4, 2020)

The talk of Romana had me looking up Lalla Ward on Wikipedia. 
Loads of crazy stuff.
I didn't know she was married to Richard Dawkins!
Her great grandmother was the first person in the world to be killed by a car.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 5, 2020)

Excellent episode, definatly one of the best 2nd part to a story I've seen. I'm a very happy who bunny


----------



## T & P (Jan 5, 2020)

Christmas specials can be hit and miss, but I thought this one certainly was one of the better ones.


----------



## spanglechick (Jan 5, 2020)

I feel like the writing has caught up with Whittaker’s characterisation of the Doctor. She is now possibly my favourite new Who doctor.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 5, 2020)

I don't know. I'm not feeling it. Although the galifray secret intrigues me. . . . Wish they hadn't blown it all up.
Bring Romana back.


----------



## Epona (Jan 5, 2020)

I absolutely LOVE the new Master - I really got the feeling that he was thoroughly enjoying the role, and that came across well


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 6, 2020)

Enjoyed it so much I've already rewatched it twice


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 6, 2020)

Good finish , what did they do with the masters tardis though, did I miss a bit.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 6, 2020)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> The talk of Romana had me looking up Lalla Ward on Wikipedia.
> Loads of crazy stuff.
> I didn't know she was married to Richard Dawkins!
> Her great grandmother was the first person in the world to be killed by a car.



Married to Dawkins, Tom Baker, moved in the same circles as Douglas Adams etc. Lalla Ward's Romana was great. For a wee while, some of us thought that Missy might be a returning Romana, pissed off with the Doctor for leaving her in E-Space...


----------



## Epona (Jan 6, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Married to Dawkins, Tom Baker, moved in the same circles as Douglas Adams etc. Lalla Ward's Romana was great. For a wee while, some of us thought that Missy might be a returning Romana, pissed off with the Doctor for leaving her in E-Space...



I loved that whole era of Doctor Who - Tom Baker is still my favourite, and I loved Lalla Ward too.


----------



## Detroit City (Jan 6, 2020)

I recorded Ep 1 and am recording Ep 2 right now as we speak.  can't wait to watch them.  looks as if the urban reviews are pretty good


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 6, 2020)

Detroit City said:


> I recorded Ep 1 and am recording Ep 2 right now as we speak.  can't wait to watch them.  looks as if the urban reviews are pretty good


Ep1 is good ,ep 2 is better and I'd advise avoiding social media if you want to stay spoiler free


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 6, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Married to Dawkins, Tom Baker, moved in the same circles as Douglas Adams etc. Lalla Ward's Romana was great. For a wee while, some of us thought that Missy might be a returning Romana, pissed off with the Doctor for leaving her in E-Space...


He didn't leave her in e space. She was called back to galifray but had gotten a taste for adventure during her time with the doctor so pissed off in e space where they wouldn't bother her. He even let her have K9.
That should have been the spin off series.


----------



## kalidarkone (Jan 6, 2020)

Yeah episode 2 I actually stopped what I was doing to watch it. Normally Dr Who is just background for me.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2020)

I really liked it. I thought episode 2 was better than episode 1, and I’m pleased that the theme of the Doctor not wanting to change history, and imperfectly trying to adhere to that goal, has returned. I like the idea that she wiped the memories of those people from history, so that their achievements can be theirs and not a product of their contact with her. That’s something Pat Troughton’s Doctor was concerned with, but Tom Baker not so much.  It’s good that Jody Whittaker’s Doctor is giving people agency and not claiming it all for herself. Wandering rebel rather than a messiah. I like that.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 6, 2020)

I agree with everything danny la rouge has just posted, bloody good stuff.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 6, 2020)

slightly cheesy villain speech writing at the end, but aren't they always like that. I did laugh at the 'luckily there's an app for that' line. Really not sure
a)what happened to masters tardis
b) at the end theres some attempt to link odd bits from the series (brief flash of the convo with the evil towels etc) as part of the Masters revelations. I'll have to rewatch, because I don't see the  links at all





e2a
Also, Lenny Henry's character killing his mum for extra evilness and Brad milking the laser shoes with the old dancing skills were both very funny.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2020)

Oh, the ending was just “yeah, I fixed that”. But then that bit doesn’t really have to make sense. In Classic Who it was usually about reversing the polarity of the neutron flow or something to do with bundles of wires.   It’s the ride that matters.


----------



## Helen Back (Jan 6, 2020)

Ah yes, the old "time travel by just waiting around a very long time" ploy. Why didn't he age? Why didn't he help his past selves with their plots? Yes, he said he'd escaped loads of times but he wasn't incarcerated for the whole of that time. And as Marvin once said, "It's alright for you, I had to go the long way round."


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2020)

🧣


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 6, 2020)

The plot made no sense at all, but in that good way.

Also Lenny Henry is looking great for his age.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> Also Lenny Henry is looking great for his age.


So much so that when I said “that’s Lenny Henry”, everyone in the room was like “no it’s not! That guy’s much younger”


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 6, 2020)

Helen Back said:


> Ah yes, the old "time travel by just waiting around a very long time" ploy. Why didn't he age? Why didn't he help his past selves with their plots? Yes, he said he'd escaped loads of times but he wasn't incarcerated for the whole of that time. And as Marvin once said, "It's alright for you, I had to go the long way round."


He didnt age  because it was only 70 odd years that he was stuck, barely any time for a time lord  and it didn’t end well for them the last time they met themselves


----------



## Cloo (Jan 6, 2020)

Also thought this really came into its own in ep2 - liked the use of two cool historical women, like this incarnation of The Master, has charisma and clearly we'll see more of him, and presumably Barton, around whom questions remaim.

The Gallifrey scenario looks like it could give some more shape to this series, which I think the show could do with.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 7, 2020)

Chibnall is such an appalling writer.  The pacing is terrible, there’s deus ex machina, it’s all tell rather than show, he brings in characters to just hang about in the background, the dialogue is wooden, it’s all just so yuck.  It’s a shame because the basic plotlines are fine.


----------



## Cerv (Jan 7, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Chibnall is such an appalling writer.  The pacing is terrible, there’s deus ex machina, it’s all tell rather than show, he brings in characters to just hang about in the background, the dialogue is wooden, it’s all just so yuck.  It’s a shame because the basic plotlines are fine.


I can’t remember where I read it, but someone described it as not writing accessible to 5 year olds, but writing like a 5 year old.
lines like Fry’s “I’m authorised to speak on behalf of every countries' intelligence agencies” or the Doctor’s “I’ve resolved the plot off screen” kind of show that up.
A shame as there were some fun parts in there between the chaff.


----------



## Epona (Jan 12, 2020)

Well I thoroughly enjoyed that - kind of obvious message, but I thought it was done well.


----------



## Santino (Jan 12, 2020)

Jesus Christ


----------



## CNT36 (Jan 12, 2020)

Enjoyed it even though the Doctor didn't seem particularly phased by Kane's plan for the genocide of the Dregs.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 12, 2020)

Only caught the very end of tonights, the next time trailer basically. Is that yer man from ER playing Tesla?


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 13, 2020)

A fun base under seige episode always a favourite.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2020)

It doesn’t seem possible but the writing is actually getting worse and worse.  Nothing makes any kind of internal sense.  Characters behave is preposterous ways.  Things have inconsistent actions or properties.  Stuff happens with no motivation for it.  Literally every scene contains a dozen pieces of nonsense, making it impossible to list.  But a good example is why a rescue party would contain such a random selection of individuals rather than just the trained security personnel, but that’s just the crappy tip of the shitberg.  The finer details (such as why The Doctor, with her laser focus on Earth, has never heard of Orphan 55, or the fact that you can’t burn CO2 for energy, and plants don’t do that either, or what do the Dregs eat and if they don’t, why do they need spiky teeth?) seem almost irrelevant in the sea of larger issues.

And that’s without even getting to the incredibly clumsy way of preaching its message.  Eugh.


----------



## Santino (Jan 13, 2020)

kabbes said:


> It doesn’t seem possible but the writing is actually getting worse and worse.  Nothing makes any kind of internal sense.  Characters behave is preposterous ways.  Things have inconsistent actions or properties.  Stuff happens with no motivation for it.  Literally every scene contains a dozen pieces of nonsense, making it impossible to list.  But a good example is why a rescue party would contain such a random selection of individuals rather than just the trained security personnel, but that’s just the crappy tip of the shitberg.  The finer details (such as why The Doctor, with her laser focus on Earth, has never heard of Orphan 55, or the fact that you can’t burn CO2 for energy, and plants don’t do that either, or what do the Dregs eat and if they don’t, why do they need spiky teeth?) seem almost irrelevant in the sea of larger issues.
> 
> And that’s without even getting to the incredibly clumsy way of preaching its message.  Eugh.


It felt like a (badly written) two-part story that had been hastily cut down into a single senseless episode by an intern.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 13, 2020)

The most jarring thing - the thing I can really do without - is the “and the moral of this story is” speeches. We already know the moral of the story; it’s already been telegraphed. I don’t mind stories having messages. I think sci fi is ideally suited to messages. But we get it. Don’t walk on at the end of Planet of the Apes and say “See that? That’s the Statue of Liberty that is. You know what that means? It means ...”


----------



## PursuedByBears (Jan 13, 2020)

kabbes said:


> It doesn’t seem possible but the writing is actually getting worse and worse.  Nothing makes any kind of internal sense.  Characters behave is preposterous ways.  Things have inconsistent actions or properties.  Stuff happens with no motivation for it.  Literally every scene contains a dozen pieces of nonsense, making it impossible to list.  But a good example is why a rescue party would contain such a random selection of individuals rather than just the trained security personnel, but that’s just the crappy tip of the shitberg.  The finer details (such as why The Doctor, with her laser focus on Earth, has never heard of Orphan 55, or the fact that you can’t burn CO2 for energy, and plants don’t do that either, or what do the Dregs eat and if they don’t, why do they need spiky teeth?) seem almost irrelevant in the sea of larger issues.
> 
> And that’s without even getting to the incredibly clumsy way of preaching its message.  Eugh.


This is why I've given up on Doctor Who


----------



## Plumdaff (Jan 13, 2020)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Only caught the very end of tonights, the next time trailer basically. Is that yer man from ER playing Tesla?



Looked like it to me. Agree with danny la rouge could have done without the point being hammered home, it had already been made.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 13, 2020)

Still haven't seen the previous season, gods know when we'll get it over here. But everytime I read/hear of how Doctor Who is getting worse, I think of


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2020)

Yes, it was shit back then.  But the point is that it got good again.  And then Chinballs happened and now it’s barely watchable.  Or, as PursuedByBears notes, not even that.  Which is a shame.


----------



## strung out (Jan 13, 2020)

Yes, that episode was utter dogshit. 

And didn't the end speech from the Doctor completely contradict what we've been told about fixed points in time over the last 10 years of Doctor Who?


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2020)

Oh, 100%


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 14, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Yes, it was shit back then.  But the point is that it got good again.  And then Chinballs happened and now it’s barely watchable.  Or, as PursuedByBears notes, not even that.  Which is a shame.



I've only seen one ep from the last season, and I really enjoyed it. And I haven't missed Doctor Who since the 70s, so am fretting. But I do recall a lot of ire over both RTD and Moffat's run on the programme. I guess it's never going to be perfect for everyone...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 14, 2020)

I enjoyed the first 2, but this was a complete let-down, absolute shite, let's hope it improves going forward.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 14, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> I've only seen one ep from the last season, and I really enjoyed it. And I haven't missed Doctor Who since the 70s, so am fretting. But I do recall a lot of ire over both RTD and Moffat's run on the programme. I guess it's never going to be perfect for everyone...


So you haven’t seen it but you disagree with those who have?


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 14, 2020)

kabbes said:


> So you haven’t seen it but you disagree with those who have?



uh? Disagree with some, like the reviews on Spamazon, because there will always be bad faith reviews & posts. And I imagine those "reviewers" ain't seen it, either.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 14, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> uh? Disagree with some, like the reviews on Spamazon, because there will always be bad faith reviews & posts. And I imagine those "reviewers" ain't seen it, either.


This page (actually, last page) contains a lot of people saying how bad it’s become.  Do you think we just have different taste, or do you think it’s possible for something to actually be written badly?


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 14, 2020)

kabbes said:


> This page (actually, last page) contains a lot of people saying how bad it’s become.  Do you think we just have different taste, or do you think it’s possible for something to actually be written badly?



I heard that "Rosa" was exceptional, so I don't think it's all bad news emanating about the new Who. But of course, there can be badly written episodes. There's many from the classic era, that when are almost painful to watch these days. Maybe when I get round to seeing all the new eps, I'll conform to the general consensus.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 14, 2020)

Rosa was okay.  Chibnall is credited as a writer but not the lead writer on that episode, so I guess his clumsy plotting, dialogue, characterisation, exposition and motivations weren’t interfering too much.  It still had its awkward moments, though, where he no doubt stuck his oar in.

And lest you think I am being revisionist, this is what I said about it at the time:



kabbes said:


> It was a good episode for all the reasons already said.  Well done the DW team.
> 
> Except for the premise, which was stupid.  The civil rights movement would still have happened on approximately the same timescale and in pretty much the same way if Rosa Parks hadn’t taken that one bus.  At the most straightforward level, maybe she would have refused to stand a week later instead.  At a rather more fundamental level, however, this just happened to be (one of) the spark(s) applied to a massive powder keg of social pressure and momentum.  If this spark hadn’t happened, another one would instead.  The alt-right nobjockey might as well have tried to stop all avalanches happening on Mont Blanc for all time by finding one offending pebble that had caused one of them.



I now suspect that the ahistorical approach to the story that the episode took was a Chinballs piece of plotting.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 16, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> I heard that "Rosa" was exceptional, so I don't think it's all bad news emanating about the new Who. But of course, there can be badly written episodes. There's many from the classic era, that when are almost painful to watch these days. Maybe when I get round to seeing all the new eps, I'll conform to the general consensus.


From an alternative point of view i thought it was good  both series eleven which was change of pace and a nice recovery period for the doctor and myself after the traumas of series ten, 
and so far series 12 has been truly enjoyable with orphan 55 being a throughly fun romp despite a few rough edges, grandson really enjoyed it but not suitable for youngest granddaughter who is six. 
Hope you get to catch up soon and like it


----------



## editor (Jan 19, 2020)

Isn't she a lovely woman?


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 20, 2020)

Nice little episode tonight, I'm not a big fan of historicals but I did enjoy this, had some nice comedy bits, costume and locations looked good, my non fan friend thought the aliens were scary and well done and I thought they were interesting. A bit of light relief and a fun watch though orphan 55 is my favourite so far.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 20, 2020)

It was certainly better for not being ruined by Chinballs' awful writing.  But they seem to have some kind of series policy to rush through everything.  The last 25% of every show is like a montage.  Bish bash bosh and the bad buy is gone.  There's no satisfaction to it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 20, 2020)

Much better last night. Even the little sermon was fine. It was more William Hartnell like.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 20, 2020)

editor said:


> Isn't she a lovely woman?



I was already a little bit in love with her, but I am even more so after watching that. And I don’t even like Coldplay.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 20, 2020)

She’s by far the best thing about this current version of Doctor Who (except for Bradley Walsh, who is a close second).  It’s such a shame she isn’t in an era with decent writing.


----------



## PursuedByBears (Jan 20, 2020)

kabbes said:


> It’s such a shame she isn’t in an era with decent writing.


This was also Peter Capaldi's problem in the role.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 20, 2020)

I've taken to watching fairly late on iplayer, caught last weeks and despite overall moans it wasn't that bad, the Doc is growing on me more and more. Plus I liked the indiscriminate slaughter of the guests, bit raw for who. Note Jay from Inbetweeners as the repairman with his son, not seen him in anything substantial for a while.

I'll watch last nights tonight


----------



## CNT36 (Jan 20, 2020)

My enjoyment at correctly identifying the Silurian weapon was ruined by someone referring to them as aliens.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 21, 2020)

That was enjoyable, far better than last week's.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 21, 2020)

CNT36 said:


> My enjoyment at correctly identifying the Silurian weapon was ruined by someone referring to them as aliens.


Well they are aliens to her, as she is from a differant planet to us earthlings👽


----------



## CNT36 (Jan 22, 2020)

ginger_syn said:


> Well they are aliens to her, as she is from a differant planet to us earthlings👽


No, just shit writing.


----------



## CNT36 (Jan 22, 2020)

They could of dug a little deeper in the props room. They can dress up being cheap bastards and selling it as fan service all they like but don't be lazy about it. The weapon was pretty superfluous anyway probably only there for the purposes of that conversation. The guys space magic was much more effective. And no Idris I haven't.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 22, 2020)

CNT36 said:


> No, just shit writing.


Wrong


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jan 22, 2020)

The writing is atrocious, which is becoming glaringly obvious as the novelty of a female doctor wears off, and the wooden, 2-dimensional assistants sound like extras reading from cue cards.
It's like fan fiction, written and produced by tweens.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 22, 2020)

Again wrong


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jan 22, 2020)

ginger_syn said:


> Again wrong


On Rotten Tomatoes, the audience rating for season 12 dropped as low as 8% but it has now risen back up to 14%, amid accusations that negative user reviews are being deleted and/or not published. 
I guess everyone on Rotten Tomatoes is wrong, too.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 22, 2020)

I watched David Tennant as the doctor the other day.  I used to think he was great. 
Now....he just didnt seem good anymore.. overacting....silly eyebrow thing... 
I surprised myself by wanting to turn him off. 
Weird
Is this what ageing does?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 22, 2020)

Lupa said:


> I watched David Tennant as the doctor the other day.  I used to think he was great.
> Now....he just didnt seem good anymore.. overacting....silly eyebrow thing...
> I surprised myself by wanting to turn him off.
> Weird
> Is this what ageing does?



DT almost always played the role a bit over the top. When it worked it really worked though, he was a great Doctor. I've been re-watching a few of my favourite Matt Smith episodes recently, and it has rather cemented my opinion that he is the best post-revival Doctor, and one of the best overall.


----------



## T & P (Jan 22, 2020)

The last episode made me think that considering how prolific Hollywood can be making films or series about their historical figures, I don’t recall ever seeing many about Edison, let alone any in which he was portrayed as the deceiving, dishonest, thieving twat that he was....


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 22, 2020)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> DT almost always played the role a bit over the top. When it worked it really worked though, he was a great Doctor. I've been re-watching a few of my favourite Matt Smith episodes recently, and it has rather cemented my opinion that he is the best post-revival Doctor, and one of the best overall.



Matt Smith was fantastic.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 22, 2020)

Oops I missed it. Must remember to catch up. I assume it was shite or amazing or ok.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 22, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> On Rotten Tomatoes, the audience rating for season 12 dropped as low as 8% but it has now risen back up to 14%, amid accusations that negative user reviews are being deleted and/or not published.
> I guess everyone on Rotten Tomatoes is wrong, too.


Not absolutely everyone but as it has been aknowledge by rotten tomatoes that it has been i think they call it review bombing they are taking down the false accounts that are doing this. Captain marvel according to the rotten tomatoe reviews was going to be lucky if it broke even. Sadly it is no longer no longer a reliable guide.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jan 22, 2020)

ginger_syn said:


> Not absolutely everyone but as it has been aknowledge by rotten tomatoes that it has been i think they call it review bombing they are taking down the false accounts that are doing this. Captain marvel according to the rotten tomatoe reviews was going to be lucky if it broke even. Sadly it is no longer no longer a reliable guide.


Yet it has been acknowledged by reviewers that Rotten Tomatoes are doing what's known as 'review padding', by deleting about half of the bad reviews.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 22, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> Yet it has been acknowledged by reviewers that Rotten Tomatoes are doing what's known as 'review padding', by deleting about half of the bad reviews.


Because they are fake accounts set up to deliberately down grade the ratings.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 23, 2020)

I can't wait to see it and the more people gripe and whinge about it, the more certain I am that it's going to be interesting (at the very least).


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 23, 2020)

The whinging got so bad on one forum i deleted it from my phone, but I've seen a lot of positive stuff on the internet as well. If nothing else i think you'll have fun watching them.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jan 23, 2020)

ginger_syn said:


> Because they are fake accounts set up to deliberately down grade the ratings.


Like the Marvel one that attracted thousands of bad reviews that were immediately deleted, because there was a glitch in their software?
You could just look at the viewing figures, and realise that about 2 million people have stopped watching Dr. Who since the first episode of season 12.
Or keep telling yourself that thousands of people spent thousands of hours writing fake reviews.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 23, 2020)

ginger_syn said:


> The whinging got so bad on one forum i deleted it from my phone, but I've seen a lot of positive stuff on the internet as well. If nothing else i think you'll have fun watching them.



Always have, since _The Ark in Space_! Stayed with it, over the years, through thick & thin. Collected the Target novelizations, the weekly, the monthly - anything I could spend my pocket money on. Had a scrapbook full of clippings on the show. Went to see Tom Baker as Sherlock Holmes in The Gate's production of Hugh Leonard's _The Mask of Moriarty_, saw the exhibition in Longleat, met Douglas Adams ... at one stage, reckon I could have done Mastermind on the subject of the show.

Then, I got older and enthusiasm waned, a bit. The old shows (when I finally got to see some of them) didn't match what the novels had led me to imagine. Some of them were creaky, padded out and not so "must see". I turned down an opportunity to meet Tom Baker at a signing, whereas some years previously, would have jumped at the chance.

And then the show kicked off again in 2005 & was hooked all over again. Even though the series occasionally suffered from RTD sentimentality, Moff OTT, Matt Smith and Clara... still remained faithful to the show.

Have read or watched most of the programme over the decades, which is why I find it a little difficult to believe all the reports on just how awful it is. Especially when it comes to accusations of the show being PC, woke and all that. Fuck's sake, the show has always been concerned over issues like the environment (_Green Death, Inferno_) and even rampant capitalism (_The Sun Makers_). Not to forget that the Daleks were clearly influenced by the horrors of the Nazis.

Oh, and _Captain Marvel_ is great fun.

Even the much maligned _Ghostbusters_ reboot isn't as bad as it's made out to be. Certainly a vast improvement on _Ghostbusters II._

I don't think everyone who criticizes these films/shows is a misogynist but having trawled through acres and acres of vitriol, it does seem that some men of a certain age don't like "their" heroes and childhood faves being "replaced" by women.

If fans or "fans" can get thousands and thousands of signatures to get shows saved from the axe, fave characters re-instated etc, it doesn't surprise me that the more toxic fans can take to Spamazon and other outlets to shit on _Doctor Who_.

Just my tuppence worth, of course.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 23, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> Like the Marvel one that attracted thousands of bad reviews that were immediately deleted, because there was a glitch in their software?
> You could just look at the viewing figures, and realise that about 2 million people have stopped watching Dr. Who since the first episode of season 12.
> Or keep telling yourself that thousands of people spent thousands of hours writing fake reviews.


Its a normal drop, dr who has over(though not by much) 5 million on +7 . considering the drop in ratings across the board with tv watching dr who is still doing ok,series 13 is going into producin in a few months, 
And while any funding issues the bbc will have in the future will affect  the production of many of it programmes well I'll cross that bridge when we get to it as im busy enjoying what we've got now. 
    And honestly i am not telling myself any thing about thousands of people, its a couple of hundred  at most, and its not just dr who it is across the board with sf, that stuff has played havoc with the hugo awards. People can be so bloody weird sometimes.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jan 23, 2020)

ginger_syn said:


> Its a normal drop, dr who has over(though not by much) 5 million on +7 . considering the drop in ratings across the board with tv watching dr who is still doing ok,series 13 is going into producin in a few months,
> And while any funding issues the bbc will have in the future will affect  the production of many of it programmes well I'll cross that bridge when we get to it as im busy enjoying what we've got now.
> And honestly i am not telling myself any thing about thousands of people, its a couple of hundred  at most, and its not just dr who it is across the board with sf, that stuff has played havoc with the hugo awards. People can be so bloody weird sometimes.


Except it isn't a normal drop. The Tesla episode had one of the lowest viewing figures ever in the history Dr. Who. That isn't a normal drop. It's a plummet... Off a cliff.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 23, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Always have, since _The Ark in Space_! Stayed with it, over the years, through thick & thin. Collected the Target novelizations, the weekly, the monthly - anything I could spend my pocket money on. Had a scrapbook full of clippings on the show. Went to see Tom Baker as Sherlock Holmes in The Gate's production of Hugh Leonard's _The Mask of Moriarty_, saw the exhibition in Longleat, met Douglas Adams ... at one stage, reckon I could have done Mastermind on the subject of the show.
> 
> Then, I got older and enthusiasm waned, a bit. The old shows (when I finally got to see some of them) didn't match what the novels had led me to imagine. Some of them were creaky, padded out and not so "must see". I turned down an opportunity to meet Tom Baker at a signing, whereas some years previously, would have jumped at the chance.
> 
> ...


Yes apparently if a woman makes an environmental speech its woke bleating,  rather than a message of hope. it gets depressing 
Just started collecting target, missed out as a child got a lot of catching up to do particularly looking forward to the july release of new who targets as well.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jan 23, 2020)

ginger_syn said:


> Yes apparently if a woman makes an environmental speech its woke bleating,  rather than a message of hope. it gets depressing


It has nothing to do with male or female. It's absolutely shite writing, where The Doctor happens to be a woman. The viewing figures are the worst in 31 years. It isn't because she's a woman, just as it wasn't Peter Capaldi's fault that he was shit. It's shit writing that's making it shit.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 23, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> Except it isn't a normal drop. The Tesla episode had one of the lowest viewing figures ever in the history Dr. Who. That isn't a normal drop. It's a plummet... Off a cliff.


4.04 million just on the overnights is not a plummet over a cliff, there are the +7s to factor in as well, neither is it the lowest ratings in who history, i might get back to you on those figures if i can be arsed at some point. Also again tv ratings across the whole range of tv programming is down, people watch diffrently now  which is why the +7 and+30 figures are included these days.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jan 23, 2020)

ginger_syn said:


> Yes apparently if a woman makes an environmental speech its woke bleating,  rather than a message of hope. it gets depressing


The whole shoving a point down your throat thing is depressing. It's no longer Dr. Who. It's like watching episodes of the Green Cross Code. That isn't because a woman is saying it. It's because a man wrote it.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 23, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> It has nothing to do with male or female. It's absolutely shite writing, where The Doctor happens to be a woman. The viewing figures are the worst in 31 years. It isn't because she's a woman, just as it wasn't Peter Capaldi's fault that he was shit. It's shit writing that's making it shit.


No that speech was well written, it was direct yes not shit though. And yes for a quite few fans it really is to do the fact the doctor is female though that was a general point in reply to krtet a houbys  general point in his post  not aimed at you
Its a shame you are not enjoying it at the moment i hope it improves for you


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 23, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> The whole shoving a point down your throat thing is depressing. It's no longer Dr. Who. It's like watching episodes of the Green Cross Code. That isn't because a woman is saying it. It's because a man wrote it.


 Again that was not aimed at you, chill out mate you are getting repetative.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 23, 2020)

ginger_syn said:


> Yes apparently if a woman makes an environmental speech its woke bleating,  rather than a message of hope. it gets depressing
> Just started collecting target, missed out as a child got a lot of catching up to do particularly looking forward to the july release of new who targets as well.



Spent ages as a kid, pouring over the cover artwork for the early classics. This kind of thing:







They got a bit lazy with it in the 80s, using publicity stills from the series (Peter Davison era) but it seems the new releases are harking back to the 70s covers:


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 23, 2020)

I really like the covers, apart from the crusaders I have all of those  I'm mainly getting hartnell or troughton ones when I can find them  as i didnt start watching until Pertwee , and i agree on the davison era covers ive got a couple and they are awful but at least the stories inside make up for that, well almost, kind of wish I would have found them when I was a kid though
Im quite looking forward to the cover of the crimson horror when it comes out.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 23, 2020)

If for some reason you enjoy the awful writing then good for you.  It’s still objectively awful though, in the sense that you can easily see how it fails against the measures of what makes something satisfying to watch.  It’s not the characters, nor the actors who play them though.  It’s the bizarre, stuttery pacing, the clunky dialogue, the terrible plot holes.  It’s the inconsistent character motivations — those “but why would they do that?” or “that character wouldn’t do that” moments.  It’s the brushing over the key dramatic parts, so that all tension is lost — your denouements should NOT be effectively shown as a montage with voiceover!  And it’s the plots that make no sense from within their own frame of logic.  That’s just deeply unsatisfying.

A programme can get away with failing in some of those counts but Chinballs fails on them all in everything he writes.  It’s horrible.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 23, 2020)

For fans of the original Dr Who series, they are now on Britbox, and they offer a 30-day free trail, so you can watch the lot for free, if you can manage 21 episodes a day!  





__





						Classic Doctor Who is most viewed show on BritBox by a ratio of 20:1 | Radio Times
					

A hoard of vintage Doctor Who episodes landed on the streaming service on Boxing Day and have made a huge impression with subscribers



					www.radiotimes.com
				






> In total, 627 episodes of the sci-fi series from its origin in 1963 to its initial cancellation in 1989 were added to BritBox on Boxing Day, quickly making a huge impression on its subscriber base.



For some reason, the fuckwits haven't added it to Freesat, despite both being joint ventures between the BBC & ITV.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 23, 2020)

Moffat was a brilliant writer for 6 series of dr who. Hard to replace someone like him.


----------



## CNT36 (Jan 23, 2020)

ginger_syn said:


> Yes apparently if a woman makes an environmental speech its woke bleating,  rather than a message of hope. it gets depressing
> Just started collecting target, missed out as a child got a lot of catching up to do particularly looking forward to the july release of new who targets as well.


I found it an enjoyable episode up until then. Nothing to do with who said it. To me it felt tacked on at the last second because they thought the audience were thick as shit. There were other ways they could have made it a possible future and added some hope either earlier in the episode or more organically in that final scene. William Hartnell wishing everyone a Merry Christmas was less jarring.


----------



## Cloo (Jan 25, 2020)

I finally got round to watching last weekend's Nikola Tesla episode, which I wasn't expecting to like but I actually thought was one of the better ones since Whittaker started- kept it simple, finally establishing I felt some characteristic that really belongs to Whittaker's Doctor ('You're an inventor') that I hope they can build on more (no pun intended). I don't think I'd seen the writer's name (Nina Metevier) on previous episodes? Might be a good idea to see more of her writing.

The one the week before had a good idea and twist, but annoyingly rubbish execution and storytelling.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 25, 2020)

I too watched this today. Have to say I was pretty bored. I expect it to be a bit shonky but it's beginning not to feel like Dr who and I don't know why. The daughter liked it though, and was very interested in finding more about Tesla, so the original purpose of Mr who is at least on track. I also realised I didn't remember much of the previous episode. My daughter informed me I fell asleep half way through. Hummm.


----------



## 8115 (Jan 26, 2020)

Oh my god.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 26, 2020)

Didn't last 20 minutes of the Tesla one, and the one before that was just brain-meltingly stupid. Any point watching this week's one?


----------



## BoxRoom (Jan 26, 2020)

I liked the other's TARDIS interior. Interesting episode for a change!


----------



## 8115 (Jan 26, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> Didn't last 20 minutes of the Tesla one, and the one before that was just brain-meltingly stupid. Any point watching this week's one?


I'm nearly at the end and it's really good.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 26, 2020)

Ok ill give it a shot tomorrow maybe.


----------



## tommers (Jan 26, 2020)

Would have been better if the policemen were pigs instead of rhinos. For a minute I thought they were warthogs but there you go. 

I liked it. Daughter is "really excited" for next week. So job done.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jan 26, 2020)

So it took 



Spoiler: This...



Captain Jack's return to make the first watchable episode of the series. It's not that it was a good episode. It just brought a glimmer of hope. I actually smiled when I saw him.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 27, 2020)

I liked that. It was cracking.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jan 27, 2020)

Liked that for so many things but above all grahams face after that snog, my grandkids laughed.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 27, 2020)

I thought it was great too, first time in the last 2 series , hopefully it will continue for the rest of the season.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 27, 2020)

Yep, best so far.


----------



## Chz (Jan 27, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yep, best so far.


That's not saying a lot, though. I mostly watch out of habit, more than anything else. 
Okay, enough grumpiness about the past few years - this one was fantastic!


----------



## T & P (Jan 27, 2020)

Agree, best one of recent times. Almost perfect, only (minor) complaint is that they still couldn’t resist a bit of a motivational cheesy speech at the very end of the episode.  But overall great.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 27, 2020)

That’s too strong.  It’s only the first bit of a story — it’ll turn out to be great or otherwise depending on what that story is.  But it’s a promising start.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 9, 2020)

I finally bothered to watch the episode from a week ago.  I’m still trying to work out exactly what it is that is so bad.  The stories are actually quite good.  The actors are pretty good.  The characters are quite likeable.  But it’s so boring and eye-rolling.

Firstly, I think that they make it too much of a roller-coaster. When there’s no down-time in the pace, it means there’s no light and shade.  It’s all on a level and so nothing ends up exciting.  This is particularly obvious as you get to the final act.  It’s just people running around and shouting bits of exposition to tell us what is happening or even what has already happened.  But I have no investment because the whole programme has tried to be exciting and you can’t sustain that.

Secondly, there are just too many main characters for the short story monster-of-the-week format.  There isn’t enough for them all to do.  Everybody ends up with bits of scenes and scraps of story.  And so characters are just given the job of exposition, explaining things to each other — particularly the Doctor, who spends half her time spouting techno-babble just to catch everybody up.   You could combine the characters of Ryan and Bradley Walsh (the fact I can’t remember his characters name is a bad sign), and most of what Jas does would be better done by the Doctor.  And lo, that takes you back to Doctor+companion.

Thirdly, the dialogue is horribly clunky.  Not much you can do about that apart from get different writers.  But the dialogue reminds me of nothing so much as a children’s comic.

Fourthly, the writers also don’t care about any kind of logical consistency, axiopisty, motivation or anything that makes stories work. The key moments are undermined because you think, “well why didn’t they just use the macguffin they used two episodes ago?” and “I don’t believe that character would do that.”

And to cap it all off, the moral messages are hammered gone with all the subtlety of a 100lb sledgehammer.

Other than that, it’s fine.


----------



## strung out (Feb 9, 2020)

Chibnall is the writer who gave us this remember...


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 9, 2020)

No, I don’t remember that. What the suffering soft porn hell is that?


----------



## strung out (Feb 9, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> No, I don’t remember that. What the suffering soft porn hell is that?


One of his episodes in Torchwood season one.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 9, 2020)

strung out said:


> One of his episodes in Torchwood season one.


I never saw Torchwood. It started on BBC3 before I had digital TV, then I couldn’t be bothered finding it on DVD or whatever.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 9, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> I never saw Torchwood. It started on BBC3 before I had digital TV, then I couldn’t be bothered finding it on DVD or whatever.



Very hit and miss. Imho, the only season worth a look is season 3 (Children of Earth).


----------



## kabbes (Feb 9, 2020)

Torchwood series 1 was quite awful, actually.  Not sure why I stuck with it but I’m glad I did because it got better


----------



## ginger_syn (Feb 11, 2020)

Enjoyed this weeks episode as well as last weeks praxeus, can you hear me was both a creepy and touching episode with some nice comedy moments in there as well.praxeus was a fun adventure with a good message and was enjoyed by my not we friend whom i was watching with. He was particularly impressesd with the kiss at the end as he was not expecting a sunday family show to do that.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 11, 2020)

This week's episode was my favourite so far. No obvious plot holes, decent bad guys, a bit of actual human character stuff for the three sidekicks (although I still don't get what Yas' subplot was supposed to be about tbf) and most importantly, no 'unusual energy readings' for probably the first time in Chibnall's tenure. The 'here's the moral of the story' bit was laid on a bit thick again but this time at least it felt earned. 

Direction again leaves something to be desired. For example we get a shot of an empty corridor where the monster was a minute ago, but now isn't. That doesn't really tell us anything. And the resolution, which should have been focussed on the monster turning against its creators, ended up being oh look they're in a football for some reason, oh now the football is massive again and stuck in between planets somehow. This stuff is annoying because it should be easy to fix, particularly with these longer running episodes that should have more than thirty seconds of screen time left over to do an ending properly.


----------



## ginger_syn (Feb 12, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> This week's episode was my favourite so far. No obvious plot holes, decent bad guys, a bit of actual human character stuff for the three sidekicks (although I still don't get what Yas' subplot was supposed to be about tbf) and most importantly, no 'unusual energy readings' for probably the first time in Chibnall's tenure. The 'here's the moral of the story' bit was laid on a bit thick again but this time at least it felt earned.
> 
> Direction again leaves something to be desired. For example we get a shot of an empty corridor where the monster was a minute ago, but now isn't. That doesn't really tell us anything. And the resolution, which should have been focussed on the monster turning against its creators, ended up being oh look they're in a football for some reason, oh now the football is massive again and stuck in between planets somehow. This stuff is annoying because it should be easy to fix, particularly with these longer running episodes that should have more than thirty seconds of screen time left over to do an ending properly.



Yaz's sublot was that she was feeling suicidal, as for the immortals they were distracted by the creature the doctor used the detachable fingers to put them to sleep then used the control orb to teleport them to the prison between the worlds. Hope that helps


----------



## kabbes (Feb 12, 2020)

How old is Yas supposed to be?  What year of school was she supposed to be in during that flashback?  Because the scene set it up like she was about 15, but I thought she was supposed to be more like 22-25 in the present day.  It was all a bit weird.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 12, 2020)

kabbes said:


> How old is Yas supposed to be?  What year of school was she supposed to be in during that flashback?  Because the scene set it up like she was about 15, but I thought she was supposed to be more like 22-25 in the present day.  It was all a bit weird.



Yes that really threw me off. Mandip Gill is thirtysomething, I wasn't getting 'just out of school' from her character at all. Not that I was getting much from her character tbh.


----------



## seeformiles (Feb 12, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Spent ages as a kid, pouring over the cover artwork for the early classics. This kind of thing:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Crikey - those take me back to collecting those in the 70s (good to see the modern ones have kept the same style). My first one was “The Giant Robot” (purchased at Newport Pagnell services while we were on holiday) but the strangest one I owned was this :


I’m growing to like Jodie Whitaker’s Doctor. Couldn’t stand David Tennant or Matt Smith so glad the zaniness has been toned down to a tolerable level. Agree that there’s too many companions at the moment. Would like to see the Autons make a comeback - I remember being terrified as a nipper when shop window dummies came to life and crashed through the glass trying to kill Jon Pertwee


----------



## Cloo (Feb 12, 2020)

We caught up on the last two episodes before watching Sunday’s one in a binge while gsv was getting through his ironing (he takes forever to iron a shirt)



Fugitive of the Judoon – excellent, best of this run so far, Cap’n Jack and



Spoiler: Probably not a spoiler anymore



Really want to see more of the other Doctor, afraid she rather outclasses Whittaker!



Praxeus – So-so, best aspect was the astronaut and his rocky marriage, think it’s a v good thing for family show to portray nuanced gay relationships, and gay men who are brave and adventurous to counteract stereotypes that kids might experience or have directed at them

Can you hear me? -  Liked this a lot, I know it may have been laid on thick, but thought the mental health message, especially regarding young men, was really good and well done. Kids were proper scared of Zellin and gsv freaked them out before bedtime by being bald. And having fingers.


----------



## ginger_syn (Feb 12, 2020)

kabbes said:


> How old is Yas supposed to be?  What year of school was she supposed to be in during that flashback?  Because the scene set it up like she was about 15, but I thought she was supposed to be more like 22-25 in the present day.  It was all a bit weird.


19 or 20 and she would have been at A level stage rather than gcse.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 12, 2020)

ginger_syn said:


> 19 or 20 and she would have been at A level stage rather than gcse.


That’s really jarring


----------



## Detroit City (Feb 12, 2020)

just noticed that the new lady doctor sort of looks like Amy Klobuchar who is running for President over here


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 12, 2020)

Detroit City said:


> just noticed that the new lady doctor sort of looks like Amy Klobuchar who is running for President over here


Stop saying “lady doctor”.  My 86 year old Dad doesn’t even say that.

And, no she doesn’t. Not even a bit.


----------



## Detroit City (Feb 12, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> Stop saying “lady doctor”.


ok


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 12, 2020)

Detroit City said:


> just noticed that the new lady doctor sort of looks like Amy Klobuchar who is running for President over here


If you close your eyes and borrow one of those men in black mind wipe thing, so you can't see her and can't remember who you're supposed to be comparing her to.


----------



## 8115 (Feb 12, 2020)

Why do the companions' friends and family keep noticing they've been gone?! The whole point of the Tardis is that you get back and nobody knows you've gone.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 12, 2020)

8115 said:


> Why do the companions' friends and family keep noticing they've been gone?! The whole point of the Tardis is that you get back and nobody knows you've gone.


Because it’s that or, “Jesus, Yas, you were 18 two seconds ago and now you look 32!”.


----------



## 8115 (Feb 12, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> Because it’s that or, “Jesus, Yas, you were 18 two seconds ago and now you look 32!”.


It never bothered them before.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 12, 2020)

8115 said:


> It never bothered them before.


It seemingly didn’t bother them when she was 15 either


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 12, 2020)

8115 said:


> It never bothered them before.


Continuity is like boiling a frog.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 13, 2020)

8115 said:


> Why do the companions' friends and family keep noticing they've been gone?! The whole point of the Tardis is that you get back and nobody knows you've gone.



This happens a lot for plot reasons. It was a whole big thing that Rose got back after several months and Mickey and her mum had gone frantic with worry. That was all back in the era of semi-coherent storytelling of course.


----------



## ginger_syn (Feb 13, 2020)

8115 said:


> Why do the companions' friends and family keep noticing they've been gone?! The whole point of the Tardis is that you get back and nobody knows you've gone.


Because graham and ryan have told their freinds they are travelling and Yaz's family and work think she's on secondment because thats what she told them, gives the tardis a little leeway


----------



## kabbes (Feb 13, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> This happens a lot for plot reasons. It was a whole big thing that Rose got back after several months and Mickey and her mum had gone frantic with worry. That was all back in the era of semi-coherent storytelling of course.


Back then, they bothered to include within the story telling the fact that the Doctor didn’t have full control of the Tardis and so would often get it a bit wrong.  It was something that was used in a number of important plot points. Coherent, as you say.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Feb 16, 2020)

Tonight's was fun. A crooked house, some ghosts, the Byron and Shelley crowd, and a Borg-like Cyberman. VG.


----------



## billy_bob (Feb 23, 2020)

Best of the series so far. Even the 'HERE'S THE MORAL' bit was a relatively half-arsed (therefore mercifully brief) 'why we need poets'.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 23, 2020)

It was the best of the series.  Turns out that when Chinballs isn’t credited as a writer at all, others can still do a decent job of it.


----------



## CNT36 (Feb 25, 2020)

Day and a half and not a word. Not like the old days.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 25, 2020)

CNT36 said:


> Day and a half and not a word. Not like the old days.


It’s because I feel bad to just bash it again with the same old criticisms.  Chinballs can’t write dialogue, motivation, pacing or consistency of plot, characters or internal logic.  What else can you say?

This particular episode comprised pointless running around with zero sense of jeopardy for the first 15 minutes (I noted the first point at which something else occurred).  That’s a really long time to try to sustain an action sequence even for the best of dramas.  In this case, he hadn’t established why the heroes were there at that place and time, who the newcomers are and why we should care about them, why the bad guys were also there or what was at stake.  And since the bad guys are apparently even worse shots than Imperial Stormtroopers, it was just a big yawnfest comprising background music and people gurning.

Then once the writer stopped for a second to try to build some actual characterisation, it was the usual nonsense of Big Statements and posturing.  Followed by more pointless running around. By the end of the episode, I still knew nothing about any of them and had no motive to care what happened to them.


----------



## seeformiles (Feb 25, 2020)

I thought the most convincing bit of the last episode was the Irish foundling story - genuinely disturbing at the end. As for that crap flying saucer (& the “cyber drones”), they reminded me of the ropey camera tricks they would use in 70s programmes usually accompanied by the line “...but with the magic of television!”


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 25, 2020)

i thought it was ace.  scary, gripping, action packed.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 25, 2020)

seeformiles said:


> I thought the most convincing bit of the last episode was the Irish foundling story - genuinely disturbing at the end. As for that crap flying saucer (& the “cyber drones”), they reminded me of the ropey camera tricks they would use in 70s programmes usually accompanied by the line “...but with the magic of television!”


Oh yes, I’d forgotten about the Irish bit.  What did that have to do with the rest of it?  Presumably he’s the super-cyber man or something, but there was no attempt to tie any of it together


----------



## seeformiles (Feb 25, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Oh yes, I’d forgotten about the Irish bit.  What did that have to do with the rest of it?  Presumably he’s the super-cyber man or something, but there was no attempt to tie any of it together



It was like watching two completely unrelated programmes


----------



## CNT36 (Feb 25, 2020)

kabbes said:


> It’s because I feel bad to just bash it again with the same old criticisms.  Chinballs can’t write dialogue, motivation, pacing or consistency of plot, characters or internal logic.  What else can you say?
> 
> This particular episode comprised pointless running around with zero sense of jeopardy for the first 15 minutes (I noted the first point at which something else occurred).  That’s a really long time to try to sustain an action sequence even for the best of dramas.  In this case, he hadn’t established why the heroes were there at that place and time, who the newcomers are and why we should care about them, why the bad guys were also there or what was at stake.  And since the bad guys are apparently even worse shots than Imperial Stormtroopers, it was just a big yawnfest comprising background music and people gurning.
> 
> Then once the writer stopped for a second to try to build some actual characterisation, it was the usual nonsense of Big Statements and posturing.  Followed by more pointless running around. By the end of the episode, I still knew nothing about any of them and had no motive to care what happened to them.



I didn't mind the beginning although stifling a laugh at the drones ruined the tension. You're right everything is a bit off. Why those coordinates? Why didn't everyone go straight to the (latest) snoozing cyber-army?


kabbes said:


> Oh yes, I’d forgotten about the Irish bit.  What did that have to do with the rest of it?  Presumably he’s the super-cyber man or something, but there was no attempt to tie any of it together



Timeless Child/The Doctor/The Other/The Master/Old man with the stick/Jack.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 25, 2020)

Jack became immortal later for other reasons that escape me now.  The Irish kid isn’t the Doctor or the Master either.  It just stands there, like seeformiles says, like a completely independent story right now.


----------



## CNT36 (Feb 25, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Jack became immortal later for other reasons that escape me now.  The Irish kid isn’t the Doctor or the Master either.  It just stands there, like seeformiles says, like a completely independent story right now.


Rose Tyler Time Space Magic from the Tardis. Good chance that makes "later" irrelevant. It does seem independent though.


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2020)

It was a decent first part of a finale, for me.  Not brilliant but pretty decent. Yes the drones looked silly, and, yes, it would have been nice to have had a line explaining why they had to park the Tardis so far away, but we're used to that. Young Irish guy is being sedt up as the Lone Cyberman, so he clearly cant be.  Good plotting.

And kabbes clearly needs a new watch.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 27, 2020)

belboid said:


> And kabbes clearly needs a new watch.


?
I was watching in the iplayer and I checked out the timing when they stopped the initial meaningless running around — 14:30, as I recall.


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2020)

The cybermen arrive in the eighth minute and immediately completely destroy the equipment Doc n co had set up to fend them off.  That's jeopardy.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 27, 2020)

No it’s not.  Nothing ever feels under threat.  Some red jacket ensigns that we don’t know or care about get shot but nobody else is ever really under threat, because it’s all so ACTION PEW PEW MUSIC BAD SHOOTING RUN RUN RUN with no context.  That whole beginning running around scene doesn’t actually end for over 17 minutes.



There she is, still running around at the 17:19 mark.  To sustain excitement for that length of time that is challenging even for the best of action directors and writers.  And Chinballs is most definitely not that.


----------



## lazythursday (Feb 27, 2020)

I really haven't enjoyed a lot of Chibnall episodes but I thought that one was gripping. Have high hopes for the finale. Hoping he's not going to do an RTD style damp squib.


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2020)

kabbes said:


> No it’s not.  Nothing ever feels under threat.  Some red jacket ensigns that we don’t know or care about get shot but nobody else is ever really under threat, because it’s all so ACTION PEW PEW MUSIC BAD SHOOTING RUN RUN RUN with no context.  That whole beginning running around scene doesn’t actually end for over 17 minutes.
> 
> View attachment 199970
> 
> There she is, still running around at the 17:19 mark.  To sustain excitement for that length of time that is challenging even for the best of action directors and writers.  And Chinballs is most definitely not that.


Rubbish. Sorry but that is just utter rubbish.  YOU don''t care because you have decided not to. Those 'red ensigns' were the last survivors of humanity. But yeah, fuck 'em, who cares?


----------



## kabbes (Feb 27, 2020)

belboid said:


> Rubbish. Sorry but that is just utter rubbish.  YOU don''t care because you have decided not to. Those 'red ensigns' were the last survivors of humanity. But yeah, fuck 'em, who cares?


You create sympathy for characters by building them first and making their story meaningful, not by just stating who they are and immediately killing them off.


----------



## lazythursday (Feb 27, 2020)

kabbes said:


> You create sympathy for characters by building them first and making their story meaningful, not by just stating who they are and immediately killing them off.


Not really getting to know the single story supporting characters is a pretty common flaw in Who though isn't it - classic and Nu versions. A whole new time period and set of faces and less than an hour to drive forward the plot, inevitably the character development tends to focus on the companions. That's not to say there aren't stories that have managed it. I didn't think it really mattered in this case though, I'd got to know the characters by the end and the panicked cluelessness of the Doctor when the plans failed added plenty of jeopardy.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 27, 2020)

lazythursday said:


> Not really getting to know the single story supporting characters is a pretty common flaw in Who though isn't it - classic and Nu versions. A whole new time period and set of faces and less than an hour to drive forward the plot, inevitably the character development tends to focus on the companions. That's not to say there aren't stories that have managed it. I didn't think it really mattered in this case though, I'd got to know the characters by the end and the panicked cluelessness of the Doctor when the plans failed added plenty of jeopardy.


That’s right about it being a common flaw for Who.  So it’s best to work within that and work to the series strengths, not right into the hands of its weaknesses


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Feb 27, 2020)

"Chinballs" is comedy gold. Gold, I tell you.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 27, 2020)

lazythursday said:


> I really haven't enjoyed a lot of Chibnall episodes but I thought that one was gripping. Have high hopes for the finale. Hoping he's not going to do an RTD style damp squib.



I foresee spending most of the next episode trying to work out what the fuck was going on in the previous one, most of which I've forgotten because it didn't make any fucking sense. The two parter at the start of the series suffered likewise. The cliffhanger there was they were on a magic plane during the tornado scene from the Wizard of Oz and Lenny Henry had turned into a bomb. If any of that ever got addressed in part two I didn't notice, probably because they were just relentlessly hurling more nonsense at the screen to beat the audience into a sort of bewildered acceptance.


----------



## red & green (Feb 27, 2020)

the constant use of the sonic screwdriver is really irritating


----------



## CNT36 (Feb 27, 2020)

red & green said:


> the constant use of the sonic screwdriver is really irritating


If the Doctor stopped and had to improvise or do something intelligent we'd be back to 12 parters. Must keep running, shouting and talking fast.


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2020)

CNT36 said:


> If the Doctor stopped and had to improvise or do something intelligent we'd be back to 12 parters. Must keep running, shouting and talking fast.


In the old series’ they just sat behind rocks and talked, then ran. Lots of them were bloody slow.

(The episodes that is, not the running)


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2020)

Anyway, I am looking forward to the joy when we find out none of this series matters cos we’ve been in an alternative universe all along.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 28, 2020)

red & green said:


> the constant use of the sonic screwdriver is really irritating



Yes, last week we learned it could detect Star Trek-esque 'life signs' on top of everything else.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 28, 2020)

red & green said:


> the constant use of the sonic screwdriver is really irritating



They're still relying on it? I wish they'd get rid of the damn device like they did in the Peter Davison era.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 1, 2020)

Lots to say. But for now just one word.

No.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 1, 2020)

Also, I’m furious.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 1, 2020)

😡


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 1, 2020)

Although: 

Brain of Morbius reference.

Cyber Masters.

JW.

But still. Rewriting the history of the Doctor and making her a non Time Lord and not from Gallifrey. That’s really not on. At all.


----------



## lazythursday (Mar 1, 2020)

I'd have rather it have been the Master that was the timeless child, it would have made more sense really - his rage at being experimented on / lied to. I always liked the idea of the Doctor as the time lord gone rogue, the rebel, the renegade - this turns him/her into some kind of superbeing instead, which doesn't sit right with how my childhood head conceived everything. 

On the other hand I guess having more doctors to meet in the future is kinda interesting. And I did love the cyber timelords.

Didn't get how the Ireland stuff fitted into the whole whatsoever. A bit of a mess, on the whole, though I am looking forward to the fam trying to rescue the Doctor in their Barratt home Tardis.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 1, 2020)

lazythursday said:


> though I am looking forward to the fam trying to rescue the Doctor in their Barratt home Tardis.


If Julie Graham becomes a regular part of the team that’d be a huge plus.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 1, 2020)

lazythursday said:


> . I always liked the idea of the Doctor as the time lord gone rogue, the rebel, the renegade - this turns him/her into some kind of superbeing instead,


Exactly. It’s one of the things I’m cross about. I was even mislead about it earlier in the series!


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 1, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s good that Jody Whittaker’s Doctor is giving people agency and not claiming it all for herself. Wandering rebel rather than a messiah. I like that.


----------



## PursuedByBears (Mar 1, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> . Rewriting the history of the Doctor and making her a non Time Lord and not from Gallifrey. That’s really not on. At all.


I gave up watching it a while ago, what fresh hell is this now?


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 1, 2020)

PursuedByBears said:


> I gave up watching it a while ago, what fresh hell is this now?


Yeah, sorry, should probably have been in spoiler code. But yes, fresh hell indeed.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Mar 1, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s good that Jody Whittaker’s Doctor is giving people agency and not claiming it all for herself. Wandering rebel rather than a messiah. I like that.


Yes, we should petition to change the name of the show to 'The companions... and Dr. Who'. Then petition for a decent writer... and maybe a few decent actors.


----------



## gosub (Mar 1, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> They're still relying on it? I wish they'd get rid of the damn device like they did in the Peter Davison era.



Davison rid as opposed to Capaldi rid fucking sonic raybans


----------



## CNT36 (Mar 1, 2020)

I could deal with it if Doctor Ruth hadn't had a Police Box.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Mar 1, 2020)

CNT36 said:


> I could deal with it if Doctor Ruth hadn't had a Police Box.


Timey wimey, innit.


----------



## Epona (Mar 2, 2020)

I feel a little bit disturbed by the feeling that people who don't always seem to understand the series and sometimes balls it up are playing fast and loose with the lore in such a fundamental way...


----------



## ruffneck23 (Mar 2, 2020)

it was a bit of a weird series, genuinely good in some places, yet that finale, I really didn't enjoy, even before the 'reveal' , The time-lord cyber-men ( WTAF ? )

and the 'reveal' ?  well...  How many times do you want to ret-con a series ?


----------



## strung out (Mar 2, 2020)

Still not sure if the whole Brendan/Irish thing was real, a hallucination or just a metaphor.


----------



## Santino (Mar 2, 2020)

strung out said:


> Still not sure if the whole Brendan/Irish thing was real, a hallucination or just a metaphor.


It was a sort of clue planted in her memory of being a space policeman and having her memory wiped. So, a photoshopped memory perhaps?


----------



## lazythursday (Mar 2, 2020)

I think the idea of her having a hidden past as some sort of cop / dodgy timelord CIA has a lot of potential - I just think they could have retconned that and a whole load more regenerations without all the timeless child bobbins. But I spose it gives plenty to delve into - what the cops did, and what race/civilisation she is really from. But should the programme be all about the Doctor rather than the wider universe?


----------



## Chz (Mar 2, 2020)

I honestly think this is where I throw in the towel. Even having suffered Baker #2 and the first series of McCoy.


----------



## belboid (Mar 2, 2020)

All worth it for the Tardis (a Tardis) turning into a Sheffield council house. That was great.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 2, 2020)

Well, I enjoyed that, you miserable bastards.  

Looking forward to the return of the Daleks too.



> After the shocking cliffhanger ending of Doctor Who’s series 12 finale, Jodie Whittaker and her TARDIS team will once again take on the deadly Daleks in an upcoming festive episode, with series boss Chris Chibnall promising “thrills, laughter and tears.”
> 
> Called Revolution of the Daleks, the special (which will probably air in late 2020 or early 2021) will reunite Whittaker’s Time Lord with her companions Ryan, Yaz and Graham (Tosin Cole, Mandip Gill and Bradley Walsh), and follow on directly from the ending of series 12 which saw the Doctor captured by the Judoon.
> 
> “We can’t leave the Doctor there! On that cliffhanger! Well, we did,” Chibnall said.







__





						Doctor Who: Revolution of the Daleks Christmas special festive episode | Radio Times
					

What will happen in the Doctor Who Christmas special? Jodie Whittaker returns for Revolution of the Daleks



					www.radiotimes.com


----------



## kabbes (Mar 2, 2020)

Fuck me, this series was the worst TV series of anything that I’ve actually watched from beginning to end.  And I’m including Friends in that.

The crazy thing is that the basic plots themselves were actually alright. But it was so badly written that the whole lot became a mess. Plot holes, horrible dialogue, inconsistent characterisation, the lot. And Always So Portentous. Nothing happens for a moment that is just for a bit of fun.

I stuck with it in the hope that Chinballs will soon move on and I want to not have lost the thread of the story.  But frankly, I don’t think it’s worth it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 2, 2020)

And what the fuck was Clara up to in The Name of the Doctor - Wikipedia , if this story of the   Master’s is true?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 2, 2020)

Chinballs can’t even be arsed to stay consistent with a plot line _within a single episode_.  Why the hell would you expect consistency across multiple series and with other writers?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Mar 2, 2020)

I've seen much better fan fiction. It was like a monotonous, preachy, badly written cross between scooby doo and a green cross code advert, with all the fun sucked out.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 2, 2020)

I hope the Master was conning the Doctor. I don’t mind other regenerations. But not from Gallifrey? The first to regenerate? The source of regeneration? Fuck off.


----------



## red & green (Mar 2, 2020)

At least very little sonic screwdriver action this episode but I wasn't impressed still cures my insomnia


----------



## Plumdaff (Mar 2, 2020)

Let's accept everyone is still going to watch the Christmas one regardless of your opinion of this because it's on at Christmas; this year everyone said they didn't even have a bloody Doctor Who on.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Mar 2, 2020)

Plumdaff said:


> Let's accept everyone is still going to watch the Christmas one regardless of your opinion of this because it's on at Christmas; this year everyone said they didn't even have a bloody Doctor Who on.


Have you seen how many people watch the queen's speech?
People will watch it because there's nothing else on at Christmas, not because it's good.


----------



## belboid (Mar 2, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> Have you seen how many people watch the queen's speech?
> People will watch it because there's nothing else on at Christmas, not because it's good.


the seventies called and asked for their fallacy back


----------



## Saul Goodman (Mar 2, 2020)

belboid said:


> the seventies called and asked for their fallacy back


Sorry, I didn't realise repeats of James Bond and chitty chitty bang bang counted.


----------



## ginger_syn (Mar 3, 2020)

Not been on here for a while but have to say loved that series, well apart from some minor issues with the adr and editing on a couple of episodes, the finale was exiting and beautiful, the lighting was stunning( I'm still rewatching the haunting of villa diodati for the lighting) I also particularly liked the blue colour of the cyber ship explosion, I have a sneeky feeling that chris chibnall is not too fond of gallifrey and on that note the timeless child, a very interesting plots thread that I like though it has definitely tweeked some noses . For me it fits into the hints in classic who that there was more to the doctor, it doesn't disrupt the history too much  and will be an interesting journey through the next series.


----------



## CNT36 (Mar 3, 2020)

I think it was the "That still happened but wasn't your first life" line that has been irritating me. It still happened so did all those other things we've heard about over the years but they were irrelevant as the Doctor has always been like Jo Martin or destined to have her character traits. The "first" Doctor developed slowly from wanting to cave in a caveman's head and deliberately disabling the Tardis to explore Skaro only to try and fuck off when shit got nasty to making the choice to fight the Daleks on Earth. All of that is scrapped or meaningless.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 3, 2020)

Basically, Chinballs has come up with a storyline that involves Pam Ewing waking up to see her husband Bobby Ewing stepping out of the shower.


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2020)

CNT36 said:


> I think it was the "That still happened but wasn't your first life" line that has been irritating me. It still happened so did all those other things we've heard about over the years but they were irrelevant as the Doctor has always been like Jo Martin or destined to have her character traits. The "first" Doctor developed slowly from wanting to cave in a caveman's head and deliberately disabling the Tardis to explore Skaro only to try and fuck off when shit got nasty to making the choice to fight the Daleks on Earth. All of that is scrapped or meaningless.


eh?  why are they irrelevant? They still happened and the Doctors past lives haven't stopped them doing whatever they wanted before now, so why will that change? Nothing has been scrapped. Additional lives have been hinted at for _decades. _And, even in boring human lives, we develop and change. Nothing is removed it just isn't necessarily what you thought it was.


----------



## CNT36 (Mar 3, 2020)

belboid said:


> eh?  why are they irrelevant? They still happened and the Doctors past lives haven't stopped them doing whatever they wanted before now, so why will that change? Nothing has been scrapped. Additional lives have been hinted at for _decades. _And, even in boring human lives, we develop and change. Nothing is removed it just isn't necessarily what you thought it was.


The Doctor was already the Doctor. If Doctor Ruth was pre-Hartnell then the no guns rule already applied, she had a Police box Tardis, the lot. Everything you think may have influenced that such as early adventures, the relationship with the Master, hatred of the Daleks, influence of the companions and such didn't. The Doctor has always been that person just with the odd blip along the way.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 3, 2020)

There are things in Classic Who that suggest other regenerations. The faces in the Brain of Morbius primarily. I’m fine with that. What irritates me is making the Doctor some sort of messiah. It’s fine the Doctor having a bit of a superiority complex. S/he has always thought a lot of her/himself.  But I find the superhero, all-important universal-saviour-with-destined-deep-meaning tendency in New Who very off-putting.  

I like her/him as a charismatic rogue. A wandering rebel. An eccentric meddler.

Back stories we haven’t heard before are also fine. But a backstory that makes the Doctor the original source of Time Lord regeneration is wandering into messiah territory. That’s just not attractive to me. I don’t think I’d have invested in the character if that had been there from the start. I hate superhero bollocks.


----------



## CNT36 (Mar 3, 2020)

I also got annoyed at how crap a shot your average cybernetically enhanced killing machine is.


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2020)

CNT36 said:


> The Doctor was already the Doctor. If Doctor Ruth was pre-Hartnell then the no guns rule already applied, she had a Police box Tardis, the lot. Everything you think may have influenced that such as early adventures, the relationship with the Master, hatred of the Daleks, influence of the companions and such didn't. The Doctor has always been that person just with the odd blip along the way.


So you've been complaining since the Brain of Morbius?  

Hartnell nicked the Tardis cos he liked it, maybe cos he had some hidden memory of it - changes nothing. The relationship with the Master is still essentially the same, they still went through all those experiences together, hating guns? We've just got another reason for them to do that now.  

The series seems to have been pretty popular with the kids who have watched it (going from what parents have said on here and those i know) and they are the key audience.  The idea Doc shouldn't learn new things about themself because of something written when their _grandads _first watched it is daft


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 3, 2020)

belboid said:


> The idea Doc shouldn't learn new things about themself because of something written when their _grandads _first watched it is daft


Look, the program makers know how to get in touch with me. All they need to do is run their ideas past me first. That’s all I ask.


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> There are things in Classic Who that suggest other regenerations. The faces in the Brain of Morbius primarily. I’m fine with that. What irritates me is making the Doctor some sort of messiah. It’s fine the Doctor having a bit of a superiority complex. S/he has always thought a lot of her/himself.  But I find the superhero, all-important universal-saviour-with-destined-deep-meaning tendency in New Who very off-putting.
> 
> I like her/him as a charismatic rogue. A wandering rebel. An eccentric meddler.
> 
> Back stories we haven’t heard before are also fine. But a backstory that makes the Doctor the original source of Time Lord regeneration is wandering into messiah territory. That’s just not attractive to me. I don’t think I’d have invested in the character if that had been there from the start. I hate superhero bollocks.


Now that is more reasonable. Yes, the Messiah like tendencies Moffatt so loved are a tad tossy, being too all powerful takes the fun out of it. But that doesn't _necessarily _follow from simply being the original, in fact I think Doc has been less Godlike under Chibnall, so there is plenty of reason for optimism.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 3, 2020)

belboid said:


> Now that is more reasonable. Yes, the Messiah like tendencies Moffatt so loved are a tad tossy, being too all powerful takes the fun out of it. But that doesn't _necessarily _follow from simply being the original, in fact I think Doc has been less Godlike under Chibnall, so there is plenty of reason for optimism.


Actually, now that you put it that way, “the original”, I can see myself being more at peace with it.


----------



## CNT36 (Mar 3, 2020)

belboid said:


> So you've been complaining since the Brain of Morbius?
> 
> Hartnell nicked the Tardis cos he liked it, maybe cos he had some hidden memory of it - changes nothing. The relationship with the Master is still essentially the same, they still went through all those experiences together, hating guns? We've just got another reason for them to do that now.
> 
> The series seems to have been pretty popular with the kids who have watched it (going from what parents have said on here and those i know) and they are the key audience.  The idea Doc shouldn't learn new things about themself because of something written when their _grandads _first watched it is daft


Where did I say I had a problem with previous regenerations? It could have been done better. The whole character changed for me. What was a desire for exploration and a tendency to interfere against the norms of Time Lord society is no longer an act of rebellion but learnt from mother in a past life. Reminds me of when he left Gallifrey because of a fucking hybrid or something.


----------



## strung out (Mar 3, 2020)

We all know the Doctor is half human anyway.


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> Actually, now that you put it that way, “the original”, I can see myself being more at peace with it.



That's exactly the clip I was thinking of!  Honestly....


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 3, 2020)

strung out said:


> We all know the Doctor is half human anyway.


No we fucking don’t.

🤬


----------



## strung out (Mar 3, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> No we fucking don’t.
> 
> 🤬


On his/her mother's side.


----------



## Santino (Mar 3, 2020)

The TARDIS already contains copies of all its layouts throughout its life, so in the past it must have borrowed the Police Box look from its own future.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Mar 3, 2020)

Spoiler



"Bradley Walsh to quit Doctor Who after this year's Christmas special"



been reported in a couple of places..


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 3, 2020)

ruffneck23 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Spoiler



Ah, maybe Julie Graham is his  replacement. I do hope she become a regular. She’s fab.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 3, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> Although:
> 
> Brain of Morbius reference.
> 
> ...



Been done before. Half human, s/he was at one stage (McGann?) & in the McCoy era, s/he was made out to be far more than just a TL. Merlinesque, if memory serves.

Retconning is nothing new, was only a matter of time (arf) before Doctor Who got there.


----------



## CNT36 (Mar 3, 2020)

Santino said:


> The TARDIS already contains copies of all its layouts throughout its life, so in the past it must have borrowed the Police Box look from its own future.


Everything can probably be explained away and I did think that but I'm not hitting it from a plot hole angle. They could however easily plot my issues away but it is about the character.


----------



## ginger_syn (Mar 3, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> There are things in Classic Who that suggest other regenerations. The faces in the Brain of Morbius primarily. I’m fine with that. What irritates me is making the Doctor some sort of messiah. It’s fine the Doctor having a bit of a superiority complex. S/he has always thought a lot of her/himself.  But I find the superhero, all-important universal-saviour-with-destined-deep-meaning tendency in New Who very off-putting.
> 
> I like her/him as a charismatic rogue. A wandering rebel. An eccentric meddler.
> 
> Back stories we haven’t heard before are also fine. But a backstory that makes the Doctor the original source of Time Lord regeneration is wandering into messiah territory. That’s just not attractive to me. I don’t think I’d have invested in the character if that had been there from the start. I hate superhero bollocks.


The doctor wasn't a super hero they were a lab rat, experimented on to the point of death many times. It wasn't the doctor who developed regeneration for the gallifreyans it was tecteuna, at least there was non of that floating jesus bollocks going


----------



## ginger_syn (Mar 3, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Been done before. Half human, s/he was at one stage (McGann?) & in the McCoy era, s/he was made out to be far more than just a TL. Merlinesque, if memory serves.
> 
> Retconning is nothing new, was only a matter of time (arf) before Doctor Who got there.


Strong hints that he/she was the other as well plus dr who has been retconning since the sixties.


----------



## Chz (Mar 3, 2020)

After some reflection.... 

I still hate it, *but...*

Whittaker and Dhawan both did a fantastic job. 
In fairness, Chibnall did give Ser Barristan Selmy the ending he deserved instead of some bullshit alley mugging.


----------



## CNT36 (Mar 3, 2020)

ginger_syn said:


> The doctor wasn't a super hero they were a lab rat, experimented on to the point of death many times.


That is the origin story of several superheroes.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Mar 3, 2020)

Next season will see ChinBalls rewrite the Daleks' history. They'll discover they're actually cousins of the doctor, and they'll all kiss and make up, but only after Dalek Caan pitches a curveball and comes out as a Zygon.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 3, 2020)

CNT36 said:


> That is the origin story of several superheroes.


Eggs act lee.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 4, 2020)

It's like a religion, with old sci-fi shows, some people get very upset with it, when blasphemy is committed. Some of us want it to be like when we were kids, but we're older now and not all of us embrace change. Yes, of course, there's accusations of the writing being off, or the acting being cheesy or staid. That's pretty much the history of the show. Crazy changes, silly scripts that don't make much sense under scrutiny and dodgy acting, on occasion.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Mar 4, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Crazy changes, silly scripts that don't make much sense under scrutiny and dodgy acting, on occasion.


But all of those things in every episode is some achievement.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 4, 2020)

Chz said:


> In fairness, Chibnall did give Ser Barristan Selmy the ending he deserved instead of some bullshit alley mugging.



The script laid it on pretty thick with his character though. Presumably his many long years of solitude were entirely spent dreaming up grandfatherly one-liners for the benefit of anyone who might show up needing to get into a final battle with the cybermen.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 4, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> But all of those things in every episode is some achievement.



Sounds like the good old days of Who. I can't wait to see them!


----------



## CNT36 (Mar 4, 2020)

I know regeneration has been inconsistent in the past but in an episode with such a focus on it, showing how it was introduced to two different species, implying it enabled the Time Lords to flourish and make their other advances and having it in the wrong hands become a threat to all life in the universe:  a single line explaining why a death particle would fuck it up would have been nice.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 4, 2020)

CNT36 said:


> I know regeneration has been inconsistent in the past but in an episode with such a focus on it, showing how it was introduced to two different species, implying it enabled the Time Lords to flourish and make their other advances and having it in the wrong hands become a threat to all life in the universe:  a single line explaining why a death particle would fuck it up would have been nice.


Especially since we’d just had a demonstration of CyberLord regeneration.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 4, 2020)

CNT36 said:


> I know regeneration has been inconsistent in the past but in an episode with such a focus on it, showing how it was introduced to two different species, implying it enabled the Time Lords to flourish and make their other advances and having it in the wrong hands become a threat to all life in the universe:  a single line explaining why a death particle would fuck it up would have been nice.



This way they leave the door open to bring the Master back at a later date with either no explanation for how he survived or some one-line fudge. 

Hard to tell if Dhawan had any potential to be an interesting Master as he was given fuck all to work with. Attempting to outdo Michelle Gomez in a scenery-chewing contest was never going to go that well for him though.


----------



## CNT36 (Mar 4, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> This way they leave the door open to bring the Master back at a later date with either no explanation for how he survived or some one-line fudge.
> 
> Hard to tell if Dhawan had any potential to be an interesting Master as he was given fuck all to work with. Attempting to outdo Michelle Gomez in a scenery-chewing contest was never going to go that well for him though.


He shouted something like "Quick through here" so is definitely fine.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 4, 2020)

CNT36 said:


> He shouted something like "Quick through here" so is definitely fine.



The director and editor of that episode apparently think that it takes three seconds to escape from that cyber spaceship so anything's possible.

I've done my rant about the editing on Chinball's Who already though.


----------



## ginger_syn (Mar 7, 2020)

CNT36 said:


> I know regeneration has been inconsistent in the past but in an episode with such a focus on it, showing how it was introduced to two different species, implying it enabled the Time Lords to flourish and make their other advances and having it in the wrong hands become a threat to all life in the universe:  a single line explaining why a death particle would fuck it up would have been nice.


Because it would destroy all organic materials at a cellular level.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2020)

When orange shit comes out of a TimeLord’s every particle then they kind of explode in a fiery ball and are replaced with a totally different physical being, I am pretty certain that involves destroying all organic matter at a cellular level.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 7, 2020)

BBC Responds to “The Timeless Children” Canon Complaints | Doctor Who TV
					

"What was written does not alter the flow of stories from William Hartnell’s brilliant Doctor onwards."




					www.doctorwhotv.co.uk
				




The older of my two younger brothers, also in his 50s, is one of those who actually complained to the BBC.  I care enough to moan on the Internet, but not enough to actually make a complaint. I’m already pretending most of Who of the 1980s didn’t happen.  I don’t really think the new back story does as much damage to the brand as the giant liquorice all sorts monster, for example.

I’ll wait to see how much cognitive dissonance the new back story causes me.

I may have to make the belief system of Octavianism (increasingly inaccurately named as it is) more complicated.


----------



## seeformiles (Mar 7, 2020)

Just catching up with the last episode now. I wish this incarnation of the Master would stop the maniacal laughter thing every 2 minutes - and get some trousers that fit rather than looking like a fucking hipster.


----------



## ginger_syn (Mar 7, 2020)

kabbes said:


> When orange shit comes out of a TimeLord’s every particle then they kind of explode in a fiery ball and are replaced with a totally different physical being, I am pretty certain that involves destroying all organic matter at a cellular level.


Transmuting rather than destroying, breaking everything down then rearranging it as a new person, like lego.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2020)

ginger_syn said:


> Transmuting rather than destroying, breaking everything down then rearranging it as a new person, like lego.


And if that isn’t destruction of organic matter at a cellular level, I don’t know what is.  Even the bloody DNA is being rearranged, let alone the cells.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 7, 2020)

Still, at least they tied up the whole 'Captain Jack' plot thread. Getting him out of space retirement really paid off in a coherent and satisfying way.


----------



## ginger_syn (Mar 7, 2020)

kabbes said:


> And if that isn’t destruction of organic matter at a cellular level, I don’t know what is.  Even the bloody DNA is being rearranged, let alone the cells.


Its still there though  just in flux still alive. again like lego as long as the bricks are there you can build something destroy the bricks there  is no building of anything.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2020)

ginger_syn said:


> Its still there though  just in flux still alive. again like lego as long as the bricks are there you can build something destroy the bricks there  is no building of anything.


“In flux” still involves the cells being destroyed though.

Words have meanings, even in sci-fi pseudo-magic bullshit. If they’re going to talk about “the cellular level”, that means something more than just “flibbertigibbetty woo woo”. Cells are actual things, with actual structures. If you’re turning them into orange goo, you have destroyed that structure. The organic matter has been destroyed _at a cellular level. _ If cells turning into orange goo is not destruction at the cellular level, I don’t know what is.

I can just about buy the idea that the atoms themselves are still there, transmuted and reformed.  But cells are not atoms.  Cells are formed or DNA strands and proteins and so on that are put together in a very specific way.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> Still, at least they tied up the whole 'Captain Jack' plot thread. Getting him out of space retirement really paid off in a coherent and satisfying way.


God, I’d forgotten about that.  What was the bloody point in his little cameo?


----------



## PursuedByBears (Mar 7, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> BBC Responds to “The Timeless Children” Canon Complaints | Doctor Who TV
> 
> 
> "What was written does not alter the flow of stories from William Hartnell’s brilliant Doctor onwards."
> ...


I don't think any of the latest incarnation is canon.


----------



## ginger_syn (Mar 8, 2020)

kabbes said:


> “In flux” still involves the cells being destroyed though.
> 
> Words have meanings, even in sci-fi pseudo-magic bullshit. If they’re going to talk about “the cellular level”, that means something more than just “flibbertigibbetty woo woo”. Cells are actual things, with actual structures. If you’re turning them into orange goo, you have destroyed that structure. The organic matter has been destroyed _at a cellular level. _ If cells turning into orange goo is not destruction at the cellular level, I don’t know what is.
> 
> I can just about buy the idea that the atoms themselves are still there, transmuted and reformed.  But cells are not atoms.  Cells are formed or DNA strands and proteins and so on that are put together in a very specific way.


Well luckily for me I am not a biologist so its not an issue for me, I can live with tbe dialogue that explains it plus I have had a storming good time watching this series little niggles aside so im happy and looking forward to the festive special


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 10, 2020)

it was OTT and a bit daft but enjoyable. And quite like the cliff hanger for next season. And - there is now a second tardis on earth disguised as a barret home?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 10, 2020)

Kaka Tim said:


> And - there is now a second tardis on earth disguised as a barret home?


Also, unless we have a very tedious digression at the start of the new series, apparently local authorities no longer notice illegal buildings being put up.


----------



## Santino (Mar 10, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Also, unless we have a very tedious digression at the start of the new series, apparently local authorities no longer notice illegal buildings being put up.


It's surrounded by some sort of SEP field, surely.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 10, 2020)

Santino said:


> It's surrounded by some sort of SEP field, surely.


When it comes to planning, expecting local authorities to view unsanctioned buildings as somebody else’s problem might be a little optimistic...


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Mar 10, 2020)

I've been putting off watching this, might have a go with the daughter tomorrow. I think her opinion is probably more valid than that of a 47 year old on current Who lore.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 10, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Also, unless we have a very tedious digression at the start of the new series, apparently local authorities no longer notice illegal buildings being put up.



dr who vs the bureaucratioids. A sonic screwdriver will be no use against sub-section 6b of the municipal urban planning (medium size dwellings) act.


----------



## CNT36 (Mar 10, 2020)

Kaka Tim said:


> dr who vs the bureaucratioids. A sonic screwdriver will be no use against sub-section 6b of the municipal urban planning (medium size dwellings) act.


6b? No Daleks will be given access to a backhoe loader.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2020)

I just saw the last couple of episodes and agree with most people on here. Wasn't too upset by the 'Dr isn't a timelord' thing, though it was certainly daft to mess the carefully constructed history about like that. The plots were rickety - the Irish stuff was very unclear and I wasn't even sure where the 'unprocessed' half-cyberman came from.  The final bit with the Judoon (sp?) was also a bit rubbish. They're the worst villains ever.  Only thing was it felt a bit less like children's TV, which was a bonus.


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2020)

Come on, he'd been built up through the whole series and he is an excellently creepy villain.  And the Slitheen and Abzorbaloff were way worse than the Judoon.  Not to mention the fucking Dolly Mixture Monster.


----------



## CNT36 (Mar 10, 2020)

Wilf said:


> I just saw the last couple of episodes and agree with most people on here. Wasn't too upset by the 'Dr isn't a timelord' thing, though it was certainly daft to mess the carefully constructed history about like that. The plots were rickety - the Irish stuff was very unclear and I wasn't even sure where the 'unprocessed' half-cyberman came from.  The final bit with the Judoon (sp?) was also a bit rubbish. They're the worst villains ever.  Only thing was it felt a bit less like children's TV, which was a bonus.


They muttered their way through his origins in the Mary Shelley one.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2020)

belboid said:


> Come on, he'd been built up through the whole series and he is an excellently creepy villain.  And the Slitheen and Abzorbaloff were way worse than the Judoon.  Not to mention the fucking Dolly Mixture Monster.


Wait, there's a dolly mixture fiend? That's me behind the sofa.  

Nah, the judoon are shit. Basically, the Keystone Cops reimagined as shouty bureaucrats and made out of Rhino.


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2020)

that fucker


----------



## Wilf (Mar 11, 2020)

belboid said:


> that fucker


Nah, that's probably Nadine Dorries replacement as Health Minister.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jan 22, 2022)

Tennant? WHAT?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 22, 2022)

S☼I said:


> Tennant? WHAT?


----------



## Santino (Jan 22, 2022)

Just back for the 60th anniversary special probably.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jan 22, 2022)

I hear three specials, and he will not be Doctor 10 but Doctor 14


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 22, 2022)

S☼I said:


> I hear three specials, and he will not be Doctor 10 but Doctor 14


I heard that too. But I’m betting it’s been mangled in the telling.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 22, 2022)




----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 22, 2022)

I like this idea more than the doctor being 'the magic time child'. It's fun, like when the master popped up as a woman lady.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 22, 2022)

Heard it was Michael Sheen.

Either way, is good choices although like the idea of complete unknown as well.


----------



## Epona (Jan 22, 2022)

krtek a houby said:


> Heard it was Michael Sheen.
> 
> Either way, is good choices although like the idea of complete unknown as well.



Oh, Michael Sheen would be good.  I am still grumpily holding out for Paterson Joseph mind you, his name cropped up a few years back and I was hopeful but he's not been mentioned as a contender for the role recently.

Not sure how I feel about the idea of Tennant reprising the role - I did like him as The Doctor but it depends how they are going to frame bringing him back as a future reincarnation.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 22, 2022)

Epona said:


> Not sure how I feel about the idea of Tennant reprising the role - I did like him as The Doctor but it depends how they are going to frame bringing him back as a future reincarnation.


They can do whatever they like. Romana could regenerate at will into whatever form she wanted.


----------



## Epona (Jan 22, 2022)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> They can do whatever they like. Romana could regenerate at will into whatever form she wanted.



Yes but them doing whatever they like doesn't determine whether I will like what they do


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 22, 2022)

Epona said:


> Yes but them doing whatever they like doesn't determine whether I will like what they do


Very true, but if I can think of one or two interesting reasons for it being Tennant again I'd like to think that real writers could do better. Not been a great track record for that sort of thing lately though. 
Didn't the 'curator' say he had revisited a few old faces from time to time.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 22, 2022)

Epona said:


> Oh, Michael Sheen would be good.  I am still grumpily holding out for Paterson Joseph mind you, his name cropped up a few years back and I was hopeful but he's not been mentioned as a contender for the role recently.
> 
> Not sure how I feel about the idea of Tennant reprising the role - I did like him as The Doctor but it depends how they are going to frame bringing him back as a future reincarnation.



Patterson Joseph's name has been cropping up for years. Even before the series was rebooted. He'd be great , too.

If DT is the Doctor, it would be interesting to see him reinterpret the role - play against expectations.

But reckon it's just fan wishes - they've got RTD back & DT would be a great pairing. But does he want to be associated with the role forever?


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jan 23, 2022)

krtek a houby said:


> But reckon it's just fan wishes - they've got RTD back & DT would be a great pairing. But does he want to be associated with the role forever?



Hollywood/US TV seem to like CE and MS, DT less much. Plus he's the son-in-law of himself and married to his own daugher. Jerry Springer is off the air, so this seems like a good option. Tennant and Piper back for a bit, pleeeeeeeaaaaasssssseeee!!!! They could make Rose a baddie (wolf) this time for all I care.


----------



## Santino (Jan 23, 2022)

There is a spare Tennant floating around in a parallel universe with Rose; he could turn up for a couple of adventures.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 23, 2022)

Oh fuck I don't want to see rose ever again. Hated all the Billie/Tennant nonsense.


----------



## Santino (Jan 23, 2022)

She could appear in order to defeat an insane villain clearly modelled on Lawrence Fox.


----------



## Santino (Jan 23, 2022)

Wolf Lorenz


----------

