|
Post by newt5996 on Jul 15, 2018 5:04:13 GMT
I made a video on this today, partially because of certain members of this thread, partially because of some others, and mostly because I’m fed up with the petty squabbling. youtu.be/MzSq6HOMWxc
|
|
|
Post by Timelord007 on Jul 15, 2018 6:48:49 GMT
Personally i have zero interest in series 11, I've explained in the past my reasons, sorry that i can't be more positive & open minded about a female Doctor but I'm a analogue signal in a digital age, Big Finish will more than keep me entertained over the next few years.
Got no issue if fans love Jodie as the Doctor, my only issue has ever been don't tell me to like something or that i should except the shows changes cause if i don't I'm not a true fan because that does irk me, i been a fan 39 years & used do 30 mile trips in the hiatus years to purchase the novels.
Even though i don't like the current direction the shows taking i ain't one who's going to pipe up every thread slagging the series off, one thing i learned in the last year is there are far more serious things to worry about than Doctor Who & while I'm not a fan of Jodies casting & I'll admit i reacted badly when she was announced (no excuses but occasionally my bipolar mood swings iirrationally overwhelm my thought process) she doesn't deserve that hate from toxic fandom, she's a actress hired to do a job, she hasn't taken the role to wind up hardcore whovians.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Jul 15, 2018 8:52:14 GMT
Personally i have zero interest in series 11, I've explained in the past my reasons, sorry that i can't be more positive & open minded about a female Doctor but I'm a analogue signal in a digital age, Big Finish will more than keep me entertained over the next few years. Got no issue if fans love Jodie as the Doctor, my only issue has ever been don't tell me to like something or that i should except the shows changes cause if i don't I'm not a true fan because that does irk me, i been a fan 39 years & used do 30 mile trips in the hiatus years to purchase the novels. Even though i don't like the current direction the shows taking i ain't one who's going to pipe up every thread slagging the series off, one thing i learned in the last year is there are far more serious things to worry about than Doctor Who & while I'm not a fan of Jodies casting & I'll admit i reacted badly when she was announced (no excuses but occasionally my bipolar mood swings iirrationally overwhelm my thought process) she doesn't deserve that hate from toxic fandom, she's a actress hired to do a job, she hasn't taken the role to wind up hardcore whovians. See? This is why I like timelord's approach.
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Jul 15, 2018 11:21:55 GMT
Does anyone think it odd though that the PR quotes seem designed to promote the extreme reaction? "It was time it was done" or "The show was in Danger of becoming irrelevant" whether you agree or not those are extremely provocative statements. Regards mark687 I actually kind of agree with them tbh
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 14:57:13 GMT
See? This is why I like timelord's approach.
I also understand this approach. I wasn't in favor of changing the Doctors gender either,and I'm a woman and I'm against mysoginistic comments just for the sake of it; I see the character as male, it's just that, and didn't see the need for the change. That said, I will watch because I want to see what Jodie does with the role and I simply love this show, I just keep away from the most vitriolic sector of fandom Since the wonders of the internet have entered our lives, reading other people's opinions has become very difficult to ignore. Back in the late 80's (here we go), you could at least choose not to buy the handful of fanzines dedicated to slating every aspect of the series. Back then, the Doctor wasn't even a woman - mind you, he was Scottish (imagine that!). What I mean by all this is that there has always been a very ugly side to fandom and it hasn't so much increased, it has just become more visible, I think.
What has always fascinated me is what these people want from Doctor Who. It's never scary enough/too scary/scheduled too late/too early/is too childish/not childish enough - or most prominently 'not the show I watched as a kid'. Now Jodie has been cast these people have an extra element to complain about ("The Doctor should be a man!" "Yes, but you were complaining when he was a man!" "Well, he wasn't the right man!" etc). They will never be happy.
Like Timelord007, I'm not convinced by the casting. I love everything else I've heard about this upcoming series, but I'm still not sure about the new Doctor. Hearing that CC only auditioned women for the role makes a nonsense of the 'best person for the job' philosophy practiced by Steven Moffat (which I'd hoped was universal), in my view. But I'll give it a go. Life's too short to pretend I'm not going to watch, or to lambast anyone who shows positivity towards this new approach, and certainly I wouldn't try and ruin peoples' enjoyment of it. I might enjoy it myself. Who knows? Who cares?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 15:22:12 GMT
I also understand this approach. I wasn't in favor of changing the Doctors gender either,and I'm a woman and I'm against mysoginistic comments just for the sake of it; I see the character as male, it's just that, and didn't see the need for the change. That said, I will watch because I want to see what Jodie does with the role and I simply love this show, I just keep away from the most vitriolic sector of fandom Since the wonders of the internet have entered our lives, reading other people's opinions has become very difficult to ignore. Back in the late 80's (here we go), you could at least choose not to buy the handful of fanzines dedicated to slating every aspect of the series. Back then, the Doctor wasn't even a woman - mind you, he was Scottish (imagine that!). What I mean by all this is that there has always been a very ugly side to fandom and it hasn't so much increased, it has just become more visible, I think.
What has always fascinated me is what these people want from Doctor Who. It's never scary enough/too scary/scheduled too late/too early/is too childish/not childish enough - or most prominently 'not the show I watched as a kid'. Now Jodie has been cast these people have an extra element to complain about ("The Doctor should be a man!" "Yes, but you were complaining when he was a man!" "Well, he wasn't the right man!" etc). They will never be happy.
Like Timelord007 , I'm not convinced by the casting. I love everything else I've heard about this upcoming series, but I'm still not sure about the new Doctor. Hearing that CC only auditioned women for the role makes a nonsense of the 'best person for the job' philosophy practiced by Steven Moffat (which I'd hoped was universal), in my view. But I'll give it a go. Life's too short to pretend I'm not going to watch, or to lambast anyone who shows positivity towards this new approach, and certainly I wouldn't try and ruin peoples' enjoyment of it. I might enjoy it myself. Who knows? Who cares? I didn't think Moffat ever actually did a 'best person for the job' thing for any other part than Clara? For the 11th Doctor only men were auditioned (and a black actor was the first choice and declined), for the 12th Doctor only Capaldi auditioned and Moffat lied about having loads of actors in for the part, and for Bill he made sure that she was a person of colour after realising that this casting philosophy of 'best person for the job' is total rubbish.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 15:32:41 GMT
I didn't think Moffat ever actually did a 'best person for the job' thing for any other part than Clara? For the 11th Doctor only men were auditioned (and a black actor was the first choice and declined), for the 12th Doctor only Capaldi auditioned and Moffat lied about having loads of actors in for the part, and for Bill he made sure that she was a person of colour after realising that this casting philosophy of 'best person for the job' is total rubbish. I thought he made the point when casting Matt Smith, having lined up an older actor before being wowed by the younger man. Then again, he also said that the Doctor should be played by a woman when The Queen was played by a man, which I quite liked!
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jul 15, 2018 15:39:24 GMT
I didn't think Moffat ever actually did a 'best person for the job' thing for any other part than Clara? For the 11th Doctor only men were auditioned (and a black actor was the first choice and declined), for the 12th Doctor only Capaldi auditioned and Moffat lied about having loads of actors in for the part, and for Bill he made sure that she was a person of colour after realising that this casting philosophy of 'best person for the job' is total rubbish. I thought he made the point when casting Matt Smith, having lined up an older actor before being wowed by the younger man. Then again, he also said that the Doctor should be played by a woman when The Queen was played by a man, which I quite liked! I know I've seen it reported that Bill Nighy was offered the role and of course, turned it down.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 15:50:41 GMT
I thought he made the point when casting Matt Smith, having lined up an older actor before being wowed by the younger man. Then again, he also said that the Doctor should be played by a woman when The Queen was played by a man, which I quite liked! I know I've seen it reported that Bill Nighy was offered the role and of course, turned it down. Yeah, I think that was in 2003, for the first series. Same time Hugh Grant was offered it (and subsequently said he wishes he'd done it). ManWithChips is right though, Moffat said a black male actor had turned down 11 when offered. Given Patterson Joseph was the overwhelming bookies favourite till literally the day before Matt was announced I'd be inclined to think it was him. I'm sure Russell Tovey auditioned for 11 too, as well as Ben Daniels so Moffat was open to younger or older of any colour it seems but I've never heard any serious ideas RTD or Moff auditioned women.
|
|
|
Post by thethirddoctor on Jul 15, 2018 15:54:52 GMT
I know I've seen it reported that Bill Nighy was offered the role and of course, turned it down. Yeah, I think that was in 2003, for the first series. Same time Hugh Grant was offered it (and subsequently said he wishes he'd done it). ManWithChips is right though, Moffat said a black male actor had turned down 11 when offered. Given Patterson Joseph was the overwhelming bookies favourite till literally the day before Matt was announced I'd be inclined to think it was him. I'm sure Russell Tovey auditioned for 11 too, as well as Ben Daniels so Moffat was open to younger or older of any colour it seems but I've never heard any serious ideas RTD or Moff auditioned women. Didn't Moffat say that Matt Smith was his one and only choice?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 15:59:57 GMT
Yeah, I think that was in 2003, for the first series. Same time Hugh Grant was offered it (and subsequently said he wishes he'd done it). ManWithChips is right though, Moffat said a black male actor had turned down 11 when offered. Given Patterson Joseph was the overwhelming bookies favourite till literally the day before Matt was announced I'd be inclined to think it was him. I'm sure Russell Tovey auditioned for 11 too, as well as Ben Daniels so Moffat was open to younger or older of any colour it seems but I've never heard any serious ideas RTD or Moff auditioned women. Didn't Moffat say that Matt Smith was his one and only choice? If he did...he certainly wasted his time auditioning quite a few others! Capaldi was the one and only choice when Moffat cast 12 - though Moffat didn't tell him that at the time - but of all the new series Doctors Matt had the most competition for the job.
|
|
|
Post by barnabaslives on Jul 15, 2018 18:01:38 GMT
My main argument - that I've said on here since we debated this well before Jodie was cast - is why should a young girl grow up knowing she can't be The Doctor...but she can be rescued by him? You'll get the "...but Romana..." "...but River..." arguments - but they were sidekicks. Who wants their daughter to grow up knowing the glass ceiling to be a sidekick is there? Rassilon's Knickers! What dark times are these when grown men roam freely about the Internet referring to Madame President of Gallifrey as a "sidekick"? These ladies have their own ranges, when did you see poor Adric gettin' his own boxset? :-) I'm not arguing against The Doctor being a woman whatsoever, but I still don't see the point of denigrating a companion as a "sidekick" - "You or your demographic 'matter' only if they are in the title role" doesn't strike me as the right "message" for anyone to be sending or receiving. Male companions traditionally also get to be the "damsel in distress" because that's probably some of the most fundamental structure of the show, that companions wander off and get into trouble and often have to be rescued. Even for the occasional ankle twist, I don't think the series has ever tried to say that predicaments only happen to girls, especially not with the gift that The Doctor has for getting into situations. I wish that everyone hoping for a female hero (myself possibly included) had gotten one that didn't just spend the last 12 incarnations as a man (and who is at high risk of turning back into a pumpkin at midnight), and it's very hard for me personally to see such a character as a definitive female figure. I'm basically thinking it's just Hartnell or Pertwee with a different hair-do, y'know? Representation, I still don't quite know what think of that concept - I still think the minute you start deliberately representing anyone, that maybe you automatically start leaving out a lot of people by default and are somehow suddenly that much further behind the times for it, because the world (or universe) is full of diversity. I'm not really sure if that kind of expectation should be rested on the show or if it should have to suffice sometimes that it is just the sort of show that would represent virtually everyone if only it were humanly possible - even if they're Alpha Centaurian. So far, nobody has convinced me it's a bad thing for The Doctor to be a woman and they're probably not going to, but likewise nobody has convinced me that it needed to happen, or that it's that wonderful or progressive a development - but does that really have to matter? It's still going to try to be fun and new and interesting and exciting and far out, and I want to watch it and enjoy it the best I can, and not have to boycott it because it did this or didn't do that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 18:24:09 GMT
My main argument - that I've said on here since we debated this well before Jodie was cast - is why should a young girl grow up knowing she can't be The Doctor...but she can be rescued by him? You'll get the "...but Romana..." "...but River..." arguments - but they were sidekicks. Who wants their daughter to grow up knowing the glass ceiling to be a sidekick is there? Rassilon's Knickers! What dark times are these when grown men roam freely about the Internet referring to Madame President of Gallifrey as a "sidekick"? These ladies have their own ranges, when did you see poor Adric gettin' his own boxset? :-) I'm not arguing against The Doctor being a woman whatsoever, but I still don't see the point of denigrating a companion as a "sidekick" - "You or your demographic 'matter' only if they are in the title role" doesn't strike me as the right "message" for anyone to be sending or receiving. Sorry, that's a bit of a fannish in-universe reading based on audio spinoffs of years later - the star of Doctor Who (and we're talking the TV show here) is The Doctor. It's the headline role, the highest paying role and the iconic one. Again this sends the message that the top job - the big kahuna - is for the boys only. I didn't say you can't have well written or wonderful supporting roles...but they're not THE role. You can prefer an audio spinoff if you like but when Romana or River or literally ANY other character ever have been in the show they're supporting characters. Lalla Ward may be "Madame President Of Gallifrey" - she never got to be the star of the BBC Show. She never earned as much as her male lead. I'm not sure a fictional title makes that glass ceiling hurt a little less. There's a reason they're called companions or assistants - titles that exist relative to the main character. His companions. His assistants. It's not denigrating - it's fact. The Doctor is the main role. Anything else by default is not. Hamlet has one of the best supporting casts in literature...but there's only one Hamlet. There's loads of great Marvel supporting characters...but they don't make what Robert Downey Jr does. Other franchises knocked these barriers down ages ago and I think, as others have said, Chibnall is right...the show would just risk looking passe if it didn't broaden it's horizons. I think most aspiring actors would rather lead their own shows watched by a global audiences in the millions than have an audio spinoff series selling by the thousand. We're all BF fans here but we're not talking about actresses who ended up with their own audio ranges. It's not even the same sport never mind the same ballpark.
|
|
|
Post by barnabaslives on Jul 15, 2018 18:44:08 GMT
Sorry, that's fannish reading based on audio spinoffs of years later - the star of Doctor Who (and we're talking the TV show here) is The Doctor. It's the headline role, the highest paying role and the iconic one. You can prefer an audio spinoff if you like but when Romana or River or literally ANY other character ever have been in the show they're supporting characters. Lalla Ward may be "Madame President Of Gallifrey" - she never got to be the star of the BBC Show. She never earned as much as her male lead. I'm not sure a fictional title makes that glass ceiling hurt a little less. There's a reason they're called companions or assistants - titles that exist relative to the main character. His companions. His assistants. It's not denigrating - it's fact. The Doctor is the main role. Anything else by default is not. I think most aspiring actors would rather lead their own shows watched by a global audiences in the millions than have an audio spinoff series selling by the thousand. Wait, are you talking about "be The Doctor" as in growing up to actually play The Doctor in the program? I think I was talking about growing up to be Gallifreyan, that's probably very different... My "on-ramp" back to the TV show being Big Finish, I tend not to treat the TV series as distinct from the audios, but if we're talking about actors rather than fictional characters being role models, I do see your point. Sorry... FWIW, maybe just me but I always think of The Doctor and companion as equal partners in adventure - usually The Doctor gets the companion into something that the companion probably has to help get The Doctor out of. :-)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 18:51:16 GMT
What about those extremist fans who love the show, think everything is great about it and can't take constructive criticism? True this place & fandom in general should be able to accept all views. However I have seen very little in the way of constructive criticism; mean-spirited, lazy & bordering on trolling criticism yes. But constructive criticism? That seems to be a rarity here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 18:58:08 GMT
What about those extremist fans who love the show, think everything is great about it and can't take constructive criticism? But constructive criticism? That seems to be a rarity here. True, but it's still better than the sort of thing that goes on over at GB.
|
|
|
Post by glutamodo on Jul 15, 2018 19:52:48 GMT
Hard to be constructive if you don't have anything to build it on!
Me, I will hold back, avoid spoilers and just judge the show hopefully with an un-jaded fresh view when it airs.
|
|
|
Post by thethirddoctor on Jul 15, 2018 20:20:41 GMT
Hard to be constructive if you don't have anything to build it on! Me, I will hold back, avoid spoilers and just judge the show hopefully with an un-jaded fresh view when it airs. What about series 10? Some real howlers there, and some fair criticism from fans.
|
|
|
Post by glutamodo on Jul 15, 2018 20:32:21 GMT
While I really did rather like Capaldi (he reminded at times of Old Sixie, who is probably my favorite Doctor) I still did cringe a couple of the episodes he was in. Those were not Capaldi's fault. It comes down to decent writing, and in conjunction with that, matching a certain tone with the series in general. Not every Capaldi story lived up to this, but I never blamed Peter for it. And that's the kind of "open mind" I hope to have for 13. I don't mind them shaking things up a bit, as long as the show still feels like Dr Who to me.
|
|
|
Post by analex on Jul 19, 2018 9:25:53 GMT
I throw a lot of the blame for the modern internet discourse down to Doug Walker and his ilk. Emotional sound-bites and poking holes instead of actual thought or reflection that sounds good in lieu of actual criticism has watered down the discourse considerably. Regardless of how you feel about the upcoming series, we've got an entire generation thinking that's legitimate criticism - no wonder we're having problems talking about things reasonably.
|
|