|
Post by redsharkJason on May 4, 2016 1:53:21 GMT
Ok, the swap from William Russel ( who actually sounded quite a lot like Hartnell ) to Purves (not very close) was kind of jarring... (ie, 1.01-02 and 1.03-04) Did Russell just not want to do it anymore? Ailing? Even though, I prefer William Russell's attendance in an adventure over Steven Taylor's. I must say that I feel that Peter Purves does an *equally amazing* job of bringing William Hartnell's character to life. I would be lying to myself, if I didn't credit Purves for being a believable First Doctor presence on audio. Whether or not William Russell does some more Big Finish audios is the million dollar question. I worry that Russell's advanced age in years might now be an obstacle for his participation in new Doctor Who output. For the sake of variety, I hope that Carole Ann Ford does the next First Doctor Short Trip Monthly. Peter Purves has proficiently done the last 3 (1 forthcoming within this month) Hartnell ones.
|
|
|
Post by Ela on May 4, 2016 2:38:26 GMT
I really don't think it bothers me that much, honestly. Besides that, I think both William Russell and Peter Purves capture different aspects of the First Doctor's persona - Russell captures the grumpy old man while Purves brings to life that playfulness and warmth that could sometimes be seen in the First Doctor. I love both interpretations equally! Agree.
|
|
|
Post by elkawho on May 4, 2016 3:31:15 GMT
Ok, the swap from William Russel ( who actually sounded quite a lot like Hartnell ) to Purves (not very close) was kind of jarring... (ie, 1.01-02 and 1.03-04) Did Russell just not want to do it anymore? Ailing? I really don't think it bothers me that much, honestly. Besides that, I think both William Russell and Peter Purves capture different aspects of the First Doctor's persona - Russell captures the grumpy old man while Purves brings to life that playfulness and warmth that could sometimes be seen in the First Doctor. I love both interpretations equally! While I love both portrayals, I actually enjoy Purves' 1st Doctor a little more.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2016 5:34:31 GMT
Ok, the swap from William Russel ( who actually sounded quite a lot like Hartnell ) to Purves (not very close) was kind of jarring... (ie, 1.01-02 and 1.03-04) Did Russell just not want to do it anymore? Ailing? Even though, I prefer William Russell's attendance in an adventure over Steven Taylor's. I must say that I feel that Peter Purves does an *equally amazing* job of bringing William Hartnell's character to life. I would be lying to myself, if I didn't credit Purves for being a believable First Doctor presence on audio. Whether or not William Russell does some more Big Finish audios is the million dollar question. I worry that Russell's advanced age in years might now be an obstacle for his participation in new Doctor Who output. For the sake of variety, I hope that Carole Ann Ford does the next First Doctor Short Trip Monthly. Peter Purves has proficiently done the last 3 (1 forthcoming within this month) Hartnell ones. William Russell's continued involvement really is the million dollar question for Early Adventures at this stage I think. With Barbara recast I think they would do stories narrated by her and Susan, with Carol Ann Ford doubling up as the Doctor, although her Doctor is naturally not as good as either William's or Peter's. Vickie would then only be able to appear in stories with Steven, but I could live with that as they're a good pairing.
|
|
bobod
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,759
|
Post by bobod on May 4, 2016 9:31:42 GMT
Ok, the swap from William Russel ( who actually sounded quite a lot like Hartnell ) to Purves (not very close) was kind of jarring... (ie, 1.01-02 and 1.03-04) Did Russell just not want to do it anymore? Ailing? It's simply the case that if it is a Ian story then William does the Doctor and if it's a Steven story Peter does it.
And I'm another that thinks Peter's Doctor is great.
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on May 4, 2016 17:18:52 GMT
Ok, the swap from William Russel ( who actually sounded quite a lot like Hartnell ) to Purves (not very close) was kind of jarring... (ie, 1.01-02 and 1.03-04) Did Russell just not want to do it anymore? Ailing? I really don't think it bothers me that much, honestly. Besides that, I think both William Russell and Peter Purves capture different aspects of the First Doctor's persona - Russell captures the grumpy old man while Purves brings to life that playfulness and warmth that could sometimes be seen in the First Doctor. I love both interpretations equally! Well, I listened to 1.02 and then 1.03 back-to-back, so that may have been the cause of the jarring. If I'd waited a day it probably wouldn't have been as noticeable.
|
|
|
Post by constonks on May 4, 2016 22:47:30 GMT
Besides that, I think both William Russell and Peter Purves capture different aspects of the First Doctor's persona - Russell captures the grumpy old man while Purves brings to life that playfulness and warmth that could sometimes be seen in the First Doctor ...which is neat because the Doctor was grumpier in Russell's time and more playful and warm in Peter's so it works.
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on May 8, 2016 21:42:45 GMT
Allright. I'll definitely keep listening to Doctor recasts.
Doesn't bother me so much, and it's more stories....from BF
|
|
|
Post by Hieronymus on May 8, 2016 23:43:07 GMT
There are only a few roles where I would be uncomfortable with recasting.
Elisabeth Sladen is top of that list because of (a) the relatively recent date of her passing away, and (b) I can't really imagine anyone successfully pulling together her performance for BF.
Likewise for Gareth Thomas or Lynda Bellingham.
|
|
|
Post by doctorkernow on May 10, 2016 11:08:57 GMT
Hello again. Hmm... Generally, I would not be in favour of recasting. I don't feel that the original actors can ever be replaced because their voice is unique. Sometimes we just have to treasure the performances we have and while we would love new adventures with our favourites we must reluctantly let them go.
The Companion Chronicles, are slightly different. These are told from the companion's point of view and each performer gives their own interpretation of their Doctor. In addition, they also worked with the original actors and have this insight to draw on.
Replacing the original actor is, for me, an approach fraught with difficulty as pointed out by agentten. Such recasting as demonstrated by Richard Hurndall, can only be a homage at best. There is not much to be gained no matter how much we'd love new adventures for Doctors 1 to 3.
However, if you like these stories then fair enough. I would say it might be worth asking David Troughton and Sean Pertwee if they would be interested in travelling in the TARDIS. Also, Christopher Ecclestone, if he really does not want to return to Who in any form; ask him whether he would allow another actor to interpret the Ninth Doctor.
My candidate has to be Stephen Beckett. His performance as Richard III in The Kingmaker was marvellous. I like many I suspect, thought it was Chris playing the role.
Finally, there are two actors who can never be replaced. Elisabeth Sladen and Nicholas Courtney had such an impact that any replacement would cheapen the memory of the original actor's interpretation of the character.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2016 11:23:19 GMT
I think that a lot of those points are just rendered moot now that BF have recast the Third Doctor. It's all well and good to say certain companions are too iconic to recast but when Tim Treloar is playing not just The Doctor himself but Jon Pertwee's specific incarnation, the horse has well and truly bolted. There's no role in the show more iconic than The Doctor itself and if BF consider that to be fairgame, I think ANY role is - given enough time for water passing under the bridge. So while I agree you can't do The Brig and Sarah-Jane I don't think that'll be the case after another decade or so. It's why the Blake's 7 range can recast Gan - where original actor David Jackson has been gone for over a decade but the thought of recasting Blake - with Gareth Thomas just passed away recently - is far, far too soon and far, far too raw. I feel like the whole debate is redundant since BF have already gone far enough down the recast road to make it clear it's something they will do where appropriate
|
|
|
Post by doctorkernow on May 10, 2016 11:51:26 GMT
Hello again.
I have not heard Tim Treloar's interpretation of the Third Doctor. I will at some point. However, I still feel it would be very difficult to recast either Elisabeth or Nicholas even after the passage of time. They are far beyond a generic companion character. The best way of using the legacy of these characters is to use Luke or Rani and Clyde with Four, Ten or Eleven to remember Sarah. For the Brigadier, I think his daughter Kate, played by Gemma Redgrave carries on the Lethbridge-Stewart story very well.
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on May 10, 2016 11:52:12 GMT
For me the horse has always already bolted, from the day Doctor Who became so well liked and treasured that it would somehow, basically under its own steam, continue indefinitely, from that day forward, the horse had bolted. Given the continuing interest in the show and the stories and given how long time is (it really is very very long) then at some point the actors would be recast, given this inevitability, it seems silly to me to fight it. The only thing that will rescue this situation is technology www.youtube.com/watch?v=grTqcQvjvNI (I was looking for a video that showed the same thing for sound/voice, but can't find one, but the tech does exist) This kind of tech will be available to BF and the like very very soon, if it's not already.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2016 16:26:45 GMT
I'm not convinced that Sarah and the Brig are so un-recastable.
If Disney can contemplate recasting Han Solo (I'm having nightmares about that) I don't think it's undoable.
I think it would be a mistake to try and recreate the older Sarah from Sarah-Jane Adventures, as that was quite recent, but a recast actress recreating a performance from the original episodes would be different - they were some 40 years ago after all. The same goes for the Brigadier.
|
|
|
Post by omega on May 10, 2016 21:14:38 GMT
I'm not convinced that Sarah and the Brig are so un-recastable. If Disney can contemplate recasting Han Solo (I'm having nightmares about that) I don't think it's undoable. I think it would be a mistake to try and recreate the older Sarah from Sarah-Jane Adventures, as that was quite recent, but a recast actress recreating a performance from the original episodes would be different - they were some 40 years ago after all. The same goes for the Brigadier. With Han Solo, that's the character at a younger age. The Dark Shadows audios have recast characters when they appear younger (Judith Collins for Dress Me in Dark Dreams) or older (Amy, David, Jamison, Tad etc). I'm sure that having a younger actor play young Han is easier than Harrison Ford doing everything and digitally altering his face in post-production. And it can't be any worse than Anakin in the prequel trilogy, can it?
|
|