Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

David Tennant Stands Down From "Doctor Who"

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the no-really-who dept.

Sci-Fi 245

Dave Knott writes "After winning the outstanding drama performance prize at the British National Television Awards, David Tennant announced that he will be quitting the iconic role of The Doctor. Quoting Tennant: 'When Doctor Who returns in 2010 it won't be with me. Now don't make me cry. I love this part, and I love this show so much that if I don't take a deep breath and move on now I never will, and you'll be wheeling me out of the Tardis in my bath chair.' Tennant will appear in a Christmas special, titled The Next Doctor, before filming four more specials in January. After that, the search will be on for the actor to play the 11th incarnation of The Doctor."

cancel ×

245 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

We have a problem (3, Informative)

Selfbain (624722) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577505)

In the old Tom Baker episodes, the 11th doctor shows up and tries to steal the lives of his former self.

Although, this could add a new twist to the show.

Re:We have a problem (3, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577657)

The Valeyard was created between the Doctor's 12th and final regenerations. It was not the 11th Doctor.

Re:We have a problem (3, Insightful)

VojakSvejk (315965) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578043)

...also, it was Colin Baker, not Tom.

And yes, I am a nerd.

Even by slashdot standards.

Mod UP, Correct (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25578651)

Beat me to it.

Although, I thought the 11th Dr. was a Peter Davidson episode. Although I may have that confused with something about 2 versions of the Brigadier meeting and causing some type of energy-smenergy thing that saved the day.

But anyhow, the Valeyard wasn't the 11st Dr. mentioned in the OP.

Re:We have a problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25577749)

Coincidentally, Tom Baker also stepped down for similar reasons. Something he says he regrets to this day.

Re:We have a problem (4, Interesting)

Goldberg's Pants (139800) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577793)

Baker had been WAY more typecast though. Plus with the success of the show I'm fairly sure Tennant's career is on a far better trajectory.

And Tom Baker is an arse anyway. Refusing to appear with other Doctors at conventions etc... Always loved him, but given what I've read and heard recently, Baker was, and will always, an arse.

Sad Tennant is leaving. He has been a fantastic Doctor. Not as big a wrench to me though as my kids. I've had eight Doctor regenerations now when this one happens. My eldest has only seen Eccleston (but never had time to get attached) and my youngest has only ever known Tennant.

Re:We have a problem (1)

gd2shoe (747932) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578243)

As I would expect. He's got something good going, I don't see why he should waste it by leaving. (Though I am glad they got rid of Catherine Tate.)

Re:We have a problem (5, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577983)

I'd say that the bigger problem is that David Tennant has been a good Doctor. I hope they can find an equally good replacement, but fear they won't.

Re:We have a problem (2, Insightful)

Falconhell (1289630) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578523)

Hugh Laurie would be a pretty good option I reckon.

Re:We have a problem (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578545)

> Hugh Laurie would be a pretty good option I reckon.

Why - is there some compelling reason why a Doctor should be able to do a really bad American accent?

Re:We have a problem (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578031)

Colin Baker != Tom Baker.

Re:We have a problem (4, Informative)

Caduceus1 (178942) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578055)

It was the Colin Baker (6th) Doctor, not Tom, and the Valeyard wasn't the 11th Doctor. The wording was strange, but it was implied that it was his last, or 13th, incarnation. And since this is Doctor Who anyways, it is possible that particular incarnation will never come to be. Plus, if the ratings are there, the Doctor will obtain or be granted additional regenerations somehow, which has already been established as possible.

Re:We have a problem (2, Insightful)

sesshomaru (173381) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578375)

He could just do what the Master did on Trakken. I loved it when, in the 5 Doctors, John Pertwee's Doctor said, "Another regeneration?" and the Master said, "Not exactly."

Some people will say, "But the Doctor isn't that Evil," and I'll reply, "Now who's being naive?"

Re:We have a problem (1)

Fluffeh (1273756) | more than 5 years ago | (#25579441)

With money to be made still, this will not stop :)

There will be a way to bring the doctor back. The budgets say so.

Re:We have a problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25578631)

In the old Tom Baker episodes, the 11th doctor shows up and tries to steal the lives of his former self.

Although, this could add a new twist to the show.

No, He appears in The Trial Of a Time Lord; which is a Colin Baker (6th) serial. And it is a regeneration of himself that is between the 11th and 12th incarnations.

Now that is the kind of nerd I am.

Re:We have a problem (1)

mabhatter654 (561290) | more than 5 years ago | (#25579509)

They could redo the episode by digitally inserting new actors and an alternate plot into the old footage like that other series did with the tribbles.

Re:We have a problem (1)

ThoraX695 (3551) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578731)

However, the introduction of the last great Time War in the 2005 series by the Ninth Doctor gives current series writers more leeway between resolving issues between the original and current series. They still have to figure out how to give him more than 12 regenerations though...

Anyway, bravo to David Tennant!

Re:We have a problem (1)

Fractal Dice (696349) | more than 5 years ago | (#25579141)

The Valeyard (from [i]Colin[/i] Baker's final season) could easily be explained away in a number of ways (eg: a regeneration of the parallel-doctor who regains a timelord essence and goes insane with jealousy because he's not the "real doctor"). It could even be one of those little things tossed in that never gets explained - left dangling for our imaginations.

As for the regeneration limit, not only has the master persisted beyond his limit by nefarious means, but in the Five Doctors, the time lords outright offered him a full set of new regenerations.

( besides, Doctor Who has never been a stickler for continuity ... most of the recurring villains have been permanently defeated at least twice ... for all we know, the Doctor might really be Rassilon )

Continuity (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25577511)

Isn't the Doctor out of regenerations now?

Re:Continuity (5, Informative)

KasperMeerts (1305097) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577559)

No, they can regenerate 12 times. So we can still switch actors until the Thirteenth doctor, where they will have to invent a way to give him new "lives". The Master succeeded in this before he died permanently.

Re:Continuity (3, Informative)

otopico (32364) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577781)

This was sidestepped by some Dr Who by saying the regeneration limit was artificial and the actual process of regenerating has more to do with the mind than the body. Some high energy being what not. But the catch is the person must not desire the change or their desire for it prevents it.

Yeah, Dr who people are odd, but it is science fiction so they can do pretty much whatever they want.

Re:Continuity (3, Interesting)

nine-times (778537) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577941)

Yeah, Dr who people are odd, but it is science fiction so they can do pretty much whatever they want

I remember reading an interview recently of someone... I think it was the head writer of the current show... saying something to the effect of, "You can't have continuity errors when you're writing a scifi show about time travel, because no matter how crazy it gets, you can always come up with a crazy explanation."

I'm paraphrasing.

Re:Continuity (3, Insightful)

gd2shoe (747932) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578223)

I love Dr Who, but please don't call it science fiction.

Re:Continuity (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578589)

I love Dr Who, but please don't call it science fiction.

I think some episodes qualify as SF in isolation. It is more of a short story collection loosely connected by fantasy.

Re:Continuity (1)

Nazlfrag (1035012) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578661)

I must insist on misunderstanding you. What are you saying - that this is a documentary? Are you from LINDA?

Re:Continuity (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25579077)

If I recall, the regeneration limit imposed by the Time Lords. Now that they're gone he is free to go beyond twelve.

Re:Continuity (1)

BorgAssimilator (1167391) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577867)

The Master succeeded in this before he died permanently.

Which was really sad. However, The Master has been able to "come back to life" before, so fingers crossed.

Honestly, I'd be willing to pretend the last 4 seasons didn't really happen, so that they could be redone "correctly" (with no time war, etc).

Re:Continuity (3, Informative)

sesshomaru (173381) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578477)

However, The Master has been able to "come back to life" before, so fingers crossed.

I wouldn't worry about that, they deliberately included that scene with his ring being taken at the end so they can bring him back if they want.

Of course, I can remember the Master being burned away in a fire till he was completely gone with nothing left, and coming back in a later episode.

He responded to the Doctor's "WTF?" (echoing those of us in the audience) with, "Come now Doctor, you know I'm indestructible."

Re:Continuity (3, Informative)

Eudial (590661) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577593)

Isn't the Doctor out of regenerations now?

Con-ti-nu-ity? What is this strange and alien concept? And what does it have to do with Doctor Who?

He's been out of generations for quite a while, if you count the fact that the serial "The Brain of Morbius" indicates that he's had several regenerations before the first doctor.

Re:Continuity (3, Insightful)

tuffy (10202) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577911)

Yet "the Three Doctors" establishes that the first Doctor is, in fact, the first. The dating of UNIT stories is also impossible to pin down (an alternative 1970s? the 1980s?) not to mention the mess caused by the TV movie's "half-human" line. Even the Daleks' origins differ wildly between what's established in their original story versus what came much later in "Genesis of the Daleks."

Continuity has never been one of Doctor Who's strong points since the show is often self-contradictory.

Re:Continuity (4, Insightful)

Nazlfrag (1035012) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578699)

You've almost got it. The real reason though, that continuity has never been one of Doctor Who's strong points is that time travel itself is often self-contradictory.

Re:Continuity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25578761)

Wow, a show about time travel having continuity issues. Who'da thunk it...

Re:Continuity (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#25579193)

as any good fan will tell you, the films are not canonical.

Re:Continuity (3, Informative)

OrangeCowHide (810076) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578541)

The 12 regeneration limit was added in as an arbitrary plot point to give a impetus to a single character in a specific episode. With a single stroke of the pen a Time Lord could only regenerate 12 times. This is fiction, as a result, with a single stroke of the pen the limitation could be removed. We knew the Doctor's real name for 8 years, before it was removed as easily as it was put in.

The deified Robert Holmes had a bit of tendency to demystify the Doctor, which is a bit of a shame. Of course, he never expected people would be talking about Doctor Who 45 years after it started (note: Robert Holmes not only created the 12 regeneration limit, he also wrote the majority of the episode which implied the Tom Baker Doctor is the 8th or 9th Doctor).

Wasn't the 1st doctor (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577517)

Incredibly old? As in grandfather status in human terms, white hair and beard?

Re:Wasn't the 1st doctor (1)

KasperMeerts (1305097) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577531)

So? When a Doctor dies, be it from old age or as always in the series in a violent way, they regenerate again to another form, presumably much younger. The second Doctor looked 30 years younger than the first.

Re:Wasn't the 1st doctor (2, Interesting)

Goldberg's Pants (139800) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577809)

Not always younger. Or at least that's not part of the canon, but it does seem to go that way. (At least until you get up around Baker/McCoy).

If I remember my lore, the only non-death regen was Troughton/Pertwee where the regen was forced on the Doctor by the Timelords. May be remembering that wrong though.

Just hope RTD has no say in the casting given that fuckwit has said he wanted to cast JK Rowling AND Price Charles in the show.

God bless you for getting the show back on the air Russell, but you are a fucking moron. "Midnight" was awesome. Take the rest of your lame scripts with you and shove them up your arse. (And you'd probably enjoy you big gay ball of Welshness.)

Re:Wasn't the 1st doctor (1)

sesshomaru (173381) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578701)

Hmmm... ok, that was before the concept of Regeneration was introduced, and in fact they said that the Timelords "changed his appearance" as a sort of punishment. (They also exiled him to the Earth, his Tardis wouldn't work.)

What if that was true? It wasn't a Regeneration, and so he has an extra one.

Or, and I think this is also perfectly valid Dr. Who canon, they could just have the magic blue Regeneration fairy show up and tap him with her interspacial quantum time energy wand (otherwise known as the magic Regeneration reset wand).

Patrick Stewart (3, Interesting)

fangorious (1024903) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577523)

I know he was slated to play the Meddling Monk, but maybe he can take over as the Dr himself instead.

Re:Patrick Stewart (1)

dalurka (540445) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577611)

He is truly a great actor and he would surely be a great doctor..
But my head would explode and it would be unwatchable for me...just as x-men...
I keep seeing Jean-Luc :(

Re:Patrick Stewart (1)

Goldberg's Pants (139800) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577821)

I read that the BBC can't cast anyone over 40 due to insurance reasons.

Don't know if there's any truth to that.

Re:Patrick Stewart (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25578045)

Patrick Stewart? No way. How about Rowan Atkinson? Or Sean Connery? They'd make excellent Doctors. Even Mel Gibson would be better than Patrick Stewart. Robert Picardo should be chosen way before Patrick Stewart.

Re:Patrick Stewart (3, Funny)

Artifakt (700173) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578427)

Actually, Rowan Atkinson has been The Doctor before - Google: "Dr. Who and the Curse of Fatal Death" for details.
(It should all count, dammit. There have thus been at least 14 reincarnations through Tennant, including Joanna Lumley and Hugh Grant. Throw them out, and what's your justification for including McCoy? Plus tossing Lumley is sexist.).

Re:Patrick Stewart (3, Funny)

ynohoo (234463) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578507)

maybe it is time for a female Doctor? I like the potential...

Re:Patrick Stewart (3, Funny)

WCLPeter (202497) | more than 5 years ago | (#25579463)

maybe it is time for a female Doctor? I like the potential...

Particularly if they bring back Jenny somehow. "You're my dad, but now you're my mum?"

Me, I'm still hoping that they figure out a way for the Doctor to break to the time locks on the Time War so that they can do another Five Doctors episode with the remaining Doctor's still living.

Re:Patrick Stewart (1)

transwarp (900569) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578491)

Robert Picardo should be chosen way before Patrick Stewart.

I'm confused...is this about the Doctor, or the Doctor?

Re:Patrick Stewart (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 5 years ago | (#25579349)

The doctor: you want me to play what?
BBC: we want you to play Doctor Who.
The doctor: I'm sorry I haven't picked a name for myself yet.
BBC: No, we want you to play Doctor Who.
The doctor: Doctor Who?
BBC: That's right.
The doctor: Well, tell me the name already! ... etc.

Re:Patrick Stewart (0)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577817)

While he's a great actor, I don't think his personality would work. He's not 'aloof' enough.

Now, Ben Browder is just enough 'out of it' for it to work. ( except he's not british of course.. )

Re:Patrick Stewart (2, Funny)

fangorious (1024903) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577897)

Not aloof enough? Don't you know he's seen everything? He's seen it all!

Re:Patrick Stewart (1)

Redfeather (1033680) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578015)

Ben Browder? Perhaps. Although he'd be a better Jack Harkness than Doctor. Now Alec Newman, on the other hand. Who's more aloof than Paul fracking Muad'Dib?

Re:Patrick Stewart (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25578275)

Ben Browder? Perhaps. Although he'd be a better Jack Harkness than Doctor. Now Alec Newman, on the other hand. Who's more aloof than Paul fracking Muad'Dib?

I think that the best Doctor would be Seth Rogen.

Re:Patrick Stewart (1)

sesshomaru (173381) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578609)

Now, Ben Browder is just enough 'out of it' for it to work. ( except he's not british of course.. )

He could use his "evil Peacekeeper captain" accent for the whole series, which I know isn't British... but hey, I'd watch.

Re:Patrick Stewart (1)

mr100percent (57156) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577935)

I dunno, the doctor is sorta jovial and flippant, while Patrick Stewart plays more serious parts.

Think of it this way, Patrick Stewart can play the doctor about as well as he could play James Bond. I didn't like the Roger Moore humor too much

Re:Patrick Stewart (1)

DragonTHC (208439) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578279)

I thought he was going to play the doctor?

Interview with David Tennant (4, Informative)

BorgAssimilator (1167391) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577587)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7698200.stm [bbc.co.uk]

It's an interview with David Tennant about his thoughts of the show and him leaving. The best thing I saw in this article was the fact that Davies was leaving, hopefully paving the way for better episodes..... (but that's just my opinion).

Re:Interview with David Tennant (4, Informative)

sunami (751539) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577641)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7698200.stm [bbc.co.uk]

It's an interview with David Tennant about his thoughts of the show and him leaving. The best thing I saw in this article was the fact that Davies was leaving, hopefully paving the way for better episodes..... (but that's just my opinion).

And Steve Moffat is picking up the reigns of main writer, the man who, in my opinion, has made the best episodes of the revived series.

Re:Interview with David Tennant (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25578109)

Which episodes did he write ?

Was 'Blink' one of them ?

Re:Interview with David Tennant (3, Informative)

PieSquared (867490) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578227)

Blink was probably my favorite episode, so I guess I might as well find out for you...

From wikipedia:

"Blink" is the tenth episode of the third series of the British science fiction television series Doctor Who. It was first broadcast on 9 June 2006, and is the only episode in the 2007 series written by Steven Moffat.

Re:Interview with David Tennant (5, Informative)

AJWM (19027) | more than 5 years ago | (#25579365)

"Blink" took the Hugo Award (voted by science fiction fans registered for Worldcon) this year for "Best Dramatic Presentation - Short Form". In 2007 that award went to the Dr. Who episode "The Girl in the Fireplace", also by Steven Moffat, and the year before that to "The Empty Child", again by Steven Moffat.

Not a bad track record.

Re:Interview with David Tennant (1)

deniable (76198) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578297)

Yes to Blink. He also wrote The Empty Child. Mummy...

Pretty much all of the really creepy episodes are his.

Re:Interview with David Tennant (5, Informative)

sapphire wyvern (1153271) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578471)

Yep. "Blink", "The Empty Child" and "The Doctor Dances", "The Girl in the Fireplace", "Silence in the Library" and "Forest of the Dead" (hey, who turned out the lights?). In other words, every single one of the best stories in the new Doctor Who (while Russell T Davies is sadly over-represented in the "worst stories" category, although he's not responsible for all of them).

Also, he wrote much of "Press Gang" and quite a few "Coupling" episodes, as well as a recent adaptation of "Jekyll" that was awesome. He's one of my favourite television writers in fact. I am looking forward to the next season *so much*.

Re:Interview with David Tennant (2, Informative)

actor_au (562694) | more than 5 years ago | (#25579575)

He wrote all of Press Gang and Coupling. A lot of British shows tend to have a single writer or fixed small writing team, its why their TV-show runs can be so short, because one guy pumping out scripts can become hard to keep up.
J. Michael Straczynski's writing on Babylon Five(he wrote much of season 1 and all of seasons 2-5 with the exception of one episode) is one of the few times anyones ever written full hour long 21-23 episode seasons solo.

Moffat also wrote Time Crash(the Fifth and Tenth Doctor cross-over charity special last year) and The Curse of the Fatal Death(another charity special with Richard E Grant, Rowan Atkinson, Jim Broadbent ,Hugh Grant, Joanna Lumely all playing the Doctor), I've had a man-crush on him since I watched Press Gang.

RTD did write some horrible episodes(Gridlock, Last of the Timelords(not horrible until the end), the last two Christmas Episodes, , ), , I think his problem was that he had great ideas for huge arcs but didn't believe in the little details that lead up to the later important big picture. His humour has been good, not brilliant, but he's been funny at times and Midnight and Turn Left were two brilliant episodes that I felt will really cement him as a good Who writer looking back (although I sometimes think that Turn Left was only really strong because the actors in it just hit their roles perfectly with a level of intensity that really hit the script for six), also in previous seasons Love & Monsters and to a smaller degree Boomtown(the whole boogie board thing was stupid but it was an interesting look at the doctor facing up to his responsibilities) were pretty good as well.

Re:Interview with David Tennant (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25578459)

And Steve Moffat is picking up the reigns of main writer

REINS. You pick up REINS. They're how you control a horse, or a team pulling a carriage.
  A king doesn't find his rule-over-his-subjects lying around on the ground! "Oh, that's where I left it! No wonder nobody would obey me."

  A king reigns in his lifetime. You rein in a horse who's running out of control.

  Thank you, this has been The Grammar Nazi Corner, here on /. Brought to you by a generous endowment from the World Nitpickers Society.

Re:Interview with David Tennant (2, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577689)

The best thing I saw in this article was the fact that Davies was leaving, hopefully paving the way for better episodes

Not so much that Davies is leaving as that Moffat is taking over. He's the author of pretty much all of the best episodes since it came back.

Re:Interview with David Tennant (1)

Goldberg's Pants (139800) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577859)

Davies leaving is an awesome thing. The man has written ONE decent script for the new show. ("Midnight").

I will never forgive him for his meddling with the "Gay Daleks on Broadway" one from season 3, and the fucking farting Slitheen.

Re:Interview with David Tennant (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25578131)

I agree, midnight was a great episode. The problem with Davies is he gets heat magazine readers watching. Gaping plotholes, pointless running around, high concept drama leading to lazy deus ex machina and all topped with lashings of overly-sentimental cheese. It's awful, but let's be realistic. If all that goes, the idiots stop watching and the budget gets slashed.

I actually only watched a few episodes of new who, blink and midnight included. I rewatched an unearthly child the other year and the dead planet story which was screened shortly after Verity Lambert died, these really show "new who" for the embarrasment it is.

Re:Interview with David Tennant (1)

BorgAssimilator (1167391) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577905)

All of the things he wrote were the same if you stop and think about it. Always some massive problem with no way of fixing it, then one little thing happens and all the enemies go bye-bye.

Also, the "fat babbies" episode (S04E01)? wtf? Did that even have a plot?

Re:Interview with David Tennant (1)

Artifakt (700173) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578683)

Spoiler:

|
|
|
|
|
V

Look at the last episodes of new season 4. The Daleks are incredibly powerful, and there's a certain Deus Ex quality to the near regeneration that turns out not to be, and to the ending. But still, the 'good guys' are constantly trying some trick or other, many of which cause real problems for the Daleks even if they don't eliminate the whole menace. At one point, the Daleks think they have killed Jack, and of course, he gets better, (but that's no surprise to the regular viewers). The Daleks keep thinking they have won various small victories such as capturing various companions, and many times the audience knows immediately they really haven't. By the second half, various of the Daleks enemies have managed to sumggle in dimension hopping devices, powerful explosives, big guns, various communicators, and a supposedly destroyed TARDIS, and the audience gets to see half a dozen setbacks for the Daleks in process. It actually looks pretty likely that at least some of this will come together into a final, successful plan.
        In the end, it's a heavily bootstrapped Donna to the rescue, which is only obvious in retrospect from a few clues in previous episodes, but still, all through the two shows, the Doctor's whole side is proactive, and every single former companion, (and even some of the Torchwood cast that have never actually met the Doctor) demonstrates how they have been preparing advance contingency plans for just such crises as this one. That's really pretty rare in TV, where the heros usually just react to the more proactive villians until the last little bit of the show.

Re:Interview with David Tennant (1)

rhyder128k (1051042) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577843)

Agreed. I'm a fan of Davies other work but I don't like what he's done with Dr Who. The endless soppy moments and the fixation on present day earth are the reasons that I stopped watching.

New direction (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25577617)

I love Tennant but this could be a good thing - current show runner Russell T Davies is leaving at exactly the same time, so not only will there but a new Doctor, but also a new guiding hand on the show.

It would be nice if we could have the Doctor actually leaving Earth for more than 1-2 episodes a season again. Less soppy romance with companions swooning over him couldn't hurt, either.

Daniel Craig (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25577619)

Daniel Craig to provide a muscular reinterpretation of Doctor Who.

"After playing another British icon who keeps reincarnating himself and playing with gadgets I feel eminently qualified for the role of the Doctor."

When asked if his time machine would continue to be a TARDIS Craig replied "No, Omega".

~ allrite

We need an older character to play the doctor. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25577785)

The old doctor who was all about a kindly gradfather/father figure giving wise advice to his young companions. Now we have a doctor who is obviously young, being disrespected by an obnoxious older companion. And nowadays the sum of his intellect is contained in his hacking his way, mcgyver-style, out of every situation.

TOM BAKER AND JON PERTWEE RULE!

I know I have the key here somewhere (2, Funny)

TornCityVenz (1123185) | more than 5 years ago | (#25577835)

Where does one go to try out for the part?

Re:I know I have the key here somewhere (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25578333)

Where does one go to try out for the part?

Just borrow a video camera for your audition tape your parent's basement will do just fine.

Intriguingly... (1)

denzacar (181829) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578765)

I just went to Facebook to copy/paste this news to a friend of mine who is a dedicated Wholigan.
And one of those annoying ads tried to inform me about "Work in Britain - Find well paid work in the UK using the largest job search engine." etc. etc.

This reminds me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25577957)

There are some shows that you watch from time to time just to see your favorite actor/actress and you actually grow fond of that.
Definitely Dr. Who ain't one of them.

Life on marzzzzzz (3, Interesting)

Shanoyu (975) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578009)

That last master (Sims) would make a great doctor. Plus there's history of time lords regenerating into people they've seen before. At least Romana did.

The next Doctor should be ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25578097)

It's time for the Doctor to go in a different direction. Tennant and Eccleston are both young, both relatively average-sized, both white males. The white male thing is an established part of the Doctor's identity; the male I think has to stay (based on everything that's been seen of Time Lord regenerations in the show's history); the white may be more flexible. I'll come back to that.

The age can be changed, of course - other doctors have been significantly older. After these two, I think it's time; not for an old doctor, but perhaps someone with a bit more maturity. I also think it would be nice to find someone with the physical stature and powerful presence that Tom Baker brought to the role. That's been missing in every Doctor since. The chosen actor should, of course, have a demonstrated ability with both comedic and dramatic roles.

So, let's see. Middle-aged, powerfully built, intelligent, charismatic, funny but with a serious side, male but not necessarily white.

The next Doctor should be Lenny Henry.

Re:The next Doctor should be ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25578259)

That'd work if he played it serious and brooding. The minute he opens his huge yammering gob and emits that irritating laugh, the entire universe will fold in on itself. That'd be about 10 minutes into his first episode.

Re:The next Doctor should be ... (2, Funny)

schon (31600) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578321)

So, let's see. Middle-aged, powerfully built, intelligent, charismatic, funny but with a serious side, male but not necessarily white.

Jeremy Clarkson! :)

Re:The next Doctor should be ... (1)

deniable (76198) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578351)

Mr. Dawn French? I can see that going off the rails in so many cool ways. Actually, ISTR that the Doctor can 'try out' different looks after a regeneration. It could be fun to have an episode of different possibilities just to play with the audience.

Let's see; Lenny Henry, Rik Mayal, Simon Pegg...

Re:The next Doctor should be ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25579207)

Bill Nighy.

However, I'm expecting it to be James Nesbitt, based on Nesbit's prior connection to Steve Moffat (They worked together for "Jeckyll", who (i believe) will be the producer replacing RTD.

Re:The next Doctor should be ... (1)

Rosy At Random (820255) | more than 5 years ago | (#25579139)

Or how about Ainsley Harriot?

OK, no.

But, seriously:

Jeremy Paxman
Desmond Morris
- for the serious presence

Bill Bailey
- for the comedy

Bruce Campbell
- for the sheer awesomeness

Chris Morris
- for my favourite of the lot

The best new Doctor would be... (1)

The Rizz (1319) | more than 5 years ago | (#25579559)

Don Warrington. He has a sense of presence that would be excellent for the next Doctor.

Hugh Laurie (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578213)

It probably won't happen, but I'd love Hugh Laurie to play the new doctor.

Re:Hugh Laurie (1)

Thiez (1281866) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578335)

> Docter, what must we do?
> Dunno, but it's not lupus!

Re:Hugh Laurie (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578411)

I think it would be great if we were Doctor House and the THE Doctor at the same time.

If you haven't read his book, you should. The man is pretty clever. And check out some of his out British shows such as "A Bit of Fry and Laurie". He can certainly do a bit of comedy if needed.

Re:Hugh Laurie (3, Funny)

hal2814 (725639) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578369)

I don't think Laurie could pull off the British accent. Zach Braff's was waaay better.

Re:Hugh Laurie (1)

schon (31600) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578559)

I don't think Laurie could pull off the British accent.

Umm, is my sarcasm detector broken, or are you completely unaware of Hugh Laurie's work outside of "House"?

Re:Hugh Laurie (1)

the-amazing-blob (917722) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578697)

For those of you confused by the parent here, Laurie was born in Oxford, so he certainly has an appropriate accent. He's just quite good with an American accent for House, MD.

Re:Hugh Laurie (3, Informative)

hal2814 (725639) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578995)

For those of you confused by the joke... [youtube.com]

Re:Hugh Laurie (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578913)

Hmmm thats a thought. Definitely time for an older Doctor.

Probably will be James Nesbitt. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25578441)

Steven Moffat is taking over the writing and has a history of using actors he knows and likes.

Not that there would be anything wrong with that. He was brilliant in Jekyll.

The Doctor's Regenerations (4, Informative)

nordaim (162919) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578445)

Time Lords were limited, I believe by Rassilon, to 12 regeneration cycles, allowing for a possible total of 13 Doctors. However, in one of the early seasons, this limit is removed from the Doctor and it is not clear whether or not it was ever reapplied.

But, with characters such as Captain Jack or Jenny (the Doctor's clone-daughter), it would be easy enough to write it out so the show can go on forever.

I am still hoping the 13th doctor is evil.

When the regenerations are over (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578565)

I'm curious what they will do then. Would be messed up to have to end there.

Re:When the regenerations are over (1)

the-amazing-blob (917722) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578709)

By this point, the Time Lords will have returned (through some highly confusing and mildly self-contradictory explanation of Time-Locks), and they'll grant the Doctor more regenerations.

A joke made by David Tennant: (1)

NoobixCube (1133473) | more than 5 years ago | (#25578827)

I think he mentioned in one of his stage appearances (jokingly) that they'd replace him with Daniel Radcliffe (famous for playing Harry Potter). Ever since then I've been taunting my brother with the idea, and he will be very pissed off if Daniel Radcliffe is the next doctor. I'm actually still on the fence on that, though. I think he wouldn't make a bad doctor, but he is still a little young for the role. With the right acting, though, youth can just vanish. If he does it right, his age wouldn't be a problem, and with a couple of exceptions, the Doctor has been getting younger-looking with each regeneration.

One word: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25579327)

Gambon.

Anne Robinson for the Doctor! (1)

SEE (7681) | more than 5 years ago | (#25579403)

No, wait, Scott Bakula!

No! Arnold Schwarzenegger, of course!

Oh, oh, how about a CGI Doctor provided by Lucasfilm!

Ray Stevenson (1)

Bullfish (858648) | more than 5 years ago | (#25579561)

would make a great doctor, as anyone who has seen Rome would attest. And it would be great to have a doctor who wasn't as physical deficient as many of doctors

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?