Jump to content
IGNORED

Doctor Who

FishyFish

By FishyFish
in Film, TV & Radio

 Share

Recommended Posts

Yozhik

Yozhik

Posted
Posted

Brook Ditty

Jingle Stream

Chorus Creek

And yeah, the similarity is evident, the difference was also highlighted in Adam's birthday broadcast to the Flesh dad. It's just a similar idea I kept being reminded of. What makes you you? Deep stuff for a kids' sci-fi series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SeanR

SeanR

Posted
Posted

Brook Ditty

Jingle Stream

Chorus Creek

And yeah, the similarity is evident, the difference was also highlighted in Adam's birthday broadcast to the Flesh dad. It's just a similar idea I kept being reminded of. What makes you you? Deep stuff for a kids' sci-fi series.

seems RTD's not the only one who likes a bit of Dick, Philip K...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eighthours

Eighthours

Posted
Posted

Does anyone have the new issue of Private Eye? The mag's Twitter account has tweeted: "So. Farewell then #Doctor_Who -- full story on the chaos at the BBC (and in the Tardis) in the new issue."

Would be interested to hear. The Eye has reported on various budget wrangles in the past, iirc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hexx

Hexx

Posted
Posted
Merrick here...

Via his Twitter stream, Steven Moffat has just confirmed that BBC has ordered 14 more episodes of DOCTOR WHO (i.e. DOCTOR WHO Series/Season 7). His Tweet reads thusly:

14 eps + Matt DEFINITELY. I've got a plan and I'm NOT TELLING YOU WHAT IT IS. Now hush or River shoots you with her Spoiler Gun .#formaqueue

BBC's Sam Hodges (Head of Communications) mirrors the sentiment, also via Twitter (this info by way of DoctorWhoNews):

#DoctorWho is returning. Fourteen new episodes have been commissioned with Matt Smith as The Doctor #bbc1

Presumably, this means a 13 episode Series/Season + a Christmas Special? Or a two part Series/Season each divided into 7 episodes? Or a three part...ah, never mind.

While news of new DOCTOR WHO is hardly unexpected, this does effectively dispel recent and conspicuously unsubstantiated rumors that WHO in 2012 might be relegated to a sequence of four specials...that Matt Smith might not be returning...etc.

Not surprising, but I never take anything like this for granted so it's awesome to hear such confirmation all the same.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/49938

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MikeJones

MikeJones

Posted
Posted

What would you recommend?

The Man in the High Castle is his least weird and is quite respected as a piece of literature rather than 'just' sci-fi/alt-histrionics.

As for Doc Who, I agree that the show is at its strongest when on the small scale, like in Blink, but as far as the more over-the-top episodes go this was quite enjoyable. I had avoided any previews and so dreaded the Cybermen having a more active role when they appeared, same goes for the Sontaran. Mercifully they turned out to be brilliantly used, the out-of-the-window shot behind Rory set a sense of scale that's rarely evident in Doctor Who, and the Sontaran was FUCKING HILARIOUS. Milk glands :lol: Not bad at all really, though I am still nonplussed as to why the Clerics wanted a Time-Lord baby so badly in the first place, or why they want to kill the Doctor.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MikeJones

MikeJones

Posted
Posted

Isn't the danger posed to River more that she will be brainwashed to become the weapon that kills the Doctor, rather than the mortal kind? Which doesn't really make it a paradox as adult River can still be around even if she 'kills a great man'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RikC

RikC

Posted
Posted

Good news. No confirmation of Gillan or Darvill, though. Have a horrible feeling their time is up.

Arthur Darvill was talking recently about returning to the theatre in London. I'd be staggered if they appear in series 7. Besides, once the dust has settled they'll presumably have a child to raise. Not exactly conducive to adventures in time and space. :D

Do they not start filming the Christmas special soon? Might give us an indication if they do any location filming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Delargey

Delargey

Posted
Posted

Yeah, I think that they will go and a regened younger River Song will be the new assistant.

Also, I think it will be the flesh Dr who dies at the end...(although I can't remember if they go all melty when they die?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eighthours

Eighthours

Posted
Posted

Also, I think it will be the flesh Dr who dies at the end...(although I can't remember if they go all melty when they die?)

No, it won't be. Moffat actually scoffed at this suggestion on Twitter a couple of days ago. It would be SHIT. And besides, it wouldn't work - the Flesh Doctor wasn't actually a Timelord and we clearly saw the regeneration energy. And where would it get the TARDIS from, etc etc etc etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lordcookie

lordcookie

Posted
Posted

Voice of the Daleks (and Zippy and George), Roy Skelton, has died aged 79.

From the Guardian:

In addition to his work on Doctor Who, Skelton also found fame as the voices of Rainbow's Zippy and George

Roy Skelton, the voice of the Daleks and George and Zippy from Rainbow, has died aged 79.

He brought Doctor Who's arch-enemies to life between 1967 and 1988, and also provided voices for the Cybermen.

But viewers will probably know him best as the voices of Zippy and George, the orange and pink puppets from ITV's long running children's show Rainbow.

Geoffrey Hayes, who fronted Rainbow, told BBC News that Skelton was "fabulous at improvising if something went wrong".

"The most wonderful thing was if Zippy and George were having an argument between themselves, it sounded like he'd double-tracked it as they seemed to be talking over each other. It was a wonderful technique and I don't know how he did it."

Rainbow was axed in 1992, but Skelton reprised Zippy's voice in the BBC1 retro-drama Ashes to Ashes in 2008.

Skelton's daughter Samantha told the BBC her father had died after suffering a stroke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Delargey

Delargey

Posted
Posted

No, it won't be. Moffat actually scoffed at this suggestion on Twitter a couple of days ago. It would be SHIT. And besides, it wouldn't work - the Flesh Doctor wasn't actually a Timelord and we clearly saw the regeneration energy. And where would it get the TARDIS from, etc etc etc etc.

It would be shit...BUT they do have to kill a doctor off for good plus when we first seen the doctor he wasn't with the tardis he was sitting on a car.

It just seems odd that they would introduce a Doctor clone and spell out that when it exploded that it could still sirvive. I'm sure they'll come up with something better but at the same time I wouldn't be that suprised if they used flesh Doctor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hexx

Hexx

Posted
Posted

No, it won't be. Moffat actually scoffed at this suggestion on Twitter a couple of days ago. It would be SHIT. And besides, it wouldn't work - the Flesh Doctor wasn't actually a Timelord and we clearly saw the regeneration energy. And where would it get the TARDIS from, etc etc etc etc.

What makes you say Flesh Doc wasn't a Timelord?

And dead Doc didn't have a TARDIS...

There's a potential significant spoiler out there for Mircale Day. Davies gave it away in an interview though, so it might not be that important:

RYAN: A con man, right, a charmer, all that kind of stuff. Along the way, especially in 'Children of Earth,' you put him through a lot of changes. Is he a really different person at the start of this season of the show?

DAVIES: Well he's literally, physically different. He's mortal. Everyone else is immortal, he's mortal. It's the biggest switch in the show, which we did in order to give us new insights into Jack. I appreciate what you're saying, that he's a different character. I think that's my job. I [there can be] a great passivity and inertia when it comes to characters on shows that are successful -- they keep coming back and they keep being the same. I'd much rather change them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eighthours

Eighthours

Posted
Posted

What makes you say Flesh Doc wasn't a Timelord?

And dead Doc didn't have a TARDIS...

When Flesh Doc was killed, he didn't regenerate. The Flesh had all the memories of the people they'd touched, and their personalities. But not the same genetic makeup. This was all hinted at the episode, iirc.

Dead Doc must have had a TARDIS, as he was leaping around in time and space and subtly leaving Amy and Rory "ho ho" messages. Though, you know: timey wimey and all that. Very interested to see how Moffat gets himself out of this one, as obviously the Doctor won't actually stay dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
roBurky

roBurky

Posted
Posted
Very interested to see how Moffat gets himself out of this one, as obviously the Doctor won't actually stay dead.

I'm not so sure on this.

The Doctor must die at some point. We've been shown that it's possible, so given enough time it must be inevitable that one day he will die permanently.

The death that we've seen is 200 years into his future. I'm not sure how avoiding that far-future death, only for it to be replaced with another far-future death that we don't yet know about is necessary. Knowing how the Doctor dies affects the people involved, but it's not preventing future adventures. It doesn't really change anything.

I don't think it even means the Doctor won't regenerate again in the future. I'm sure the writers can have time get slightly rewritten so it's always the most recent Doctor who gets shot on the beach, if they wanted to keep that as his known final death. They do that kind of stuff all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
locke_211

locke_211

Posted
Posted

I think it's almost certain that the Doctor won't actually die on the beach. By having it so early in episode 1, the whole series is surely framed as a 'how will they get out of this?' sort of puzzle. We're gradually learning more about how it came to be, like the Astronaut is perhaps the little girl, who is probably River, who was born specifically to somehow bring the Doctor down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Space Gibbon

Space Gibbon

Posted
Posted

When Flesh Doc was killed, he didn't regenerate. The Flesh had all the memories of the people they'd touched, and their personalities. But not the same genetic makeup. This was all hinted at the episode, iirc.

But Flesh Doc wasn't killed in a way that you would expect anyone to regenerate from. He wasn't stabilised (as the others were later in the Tardis). It's possible that if he had been, he would be capable of regeneration. Not saying he necessarily would be, just that he could be.

That said, I don't think they would use the Flesh again this season. Everyone jumped to the conclusion that dead Doctor was Flesh Doctor. Then it turned out that they introduced the Flesh to pull an Amy switcheroo. Then they used it again on baby. I can't see them going back to the same device AGAIN this season. Unless the Doctor sees it as justice for them tricking him before. But remember, the Doctor saw his duplicate as equal to himself, with as much right to live. I don't see him letting a Flesh copy sacrifice itself for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept