|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on Jan 4, 2021 11:34:10 GMT
My dear Chestert...ummm..@mark867. Wasn't there a line toward the end of "The Day of the Doctor" that revealed that in the time between the Eleventh Doctor and the Curator and having finally gained some control over his/her ability to regenerate, the Doctor had revisited "a few, but just the old favourites"? And doesn't the Curator himself prove that point? Is the way not already open for the Ruth Doctor to return as the fourteenth incarnation? Hmmm? *squints through eyeglass, grabs lapels and looks insufferably pleased* đ Fair point IF 13 or Post 13 Ever recovers the previous "Ruth Doc" memories Regards mark687 Don't forget in The Timeless Children we saw Ruth Doc appear in the Matrix so she still exists in some form, would be easy for her to return via some Matrix antics.
|
|
|
Post by IndieMacUser on Jan 4, 2021 11:36:03 GMT
Well this may throw some fuel on a few fires - seems like bishop would have bit their hand off for the doctor who role deadline.com/2021/01/john-bishop-closes-production-company-lola-entertainment-1234664269/ 'Lola Entertainment has been the vehicle through which Bishop has produced a number of his own projects, including BBC Oneâs The John Bishop Show, UKTVâs John Bishop: In Conversation WithâŠ, and ITVâs John Bishops Ireland.
The company also co-produced scripted shows, including the BBCâs BAFTA-winning series Detectorists, starring Mackenzie Crook and Toby Jones, and the Worzel Gummidge series of specials for BBC One.
Bishop and his Lola co-director, the agent Lisa Thomas, are winding up the company voluntarily. Creditors have been invited to submit proof of their debts by January 11 should they require repayment. The liquidation is being overseen by accountancy firm Cowgills.
According to Lolaâs most-recent accounts for the year to November 2019, the company owed creditors ÂŁ61,429 ($84,145). It had capital and reserves of ÂŁ1.26M ($1.73M) and did not employ a single permanent member of staff over the year.
The closure of Lola marks an eventful few weeks for Bishop. The comedian announced that he and his wife tested positive for coronavirus on Christmas Day, revealing that the virus was the âworst illness I have ever had.â Bishop was also unveiled as the new star of Doctor Who over the weekend."
What fuel does this add? None. Could be seen as a) a part of the reason he took the doctor who gig b) a sign that he is expecting to be with the show for a while All nonsense ofcourse probably just co-incidental but people may spin it that way
|
|
|
Post by mark687 on Jan 4, 2021 11:52:42 GMT
Fair point IF 13 or Post 13 Ever recovers the previous "Ruth Doc" memories Regards mark687 Why would the Doctor need Ruth's memories to reuse the Ruth look? OK then so one day as they Regenerate the Doc thinks "S*d it time to look like that woman who says she's me but we don't know eachother. Oh we'll give the Judoon and Gad's lot such a runaround, when they bother to start looking for us again that is". Regards mark687
|
|
|
Post by The Brigadier on Jan 4, 2021 12:14:43 GMT
Why would the Doctor need Ruth's memories to reuse the Ruth look? OK then so one day as they Regenerate the Doc thinks "S*d it time to look like that woman who says she's me but we don't know eachother. Oh we'll give the Judoon and Gad's lot such a runaround, when they bother to start looking for us again that is". Regards mark687 Hahaha!! Exactly!! The possibilities are endless. Imagine the fun TWO Ruth Doctors could have..not to mention stretching Jo's acting abilities to give us TWO distinctive personalities. đ
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2021 18:19:01 GMT
What fuel does this add? None. Could be seen as a) a part of the reason he took the doctor who gig b) a sign that he is expecting to be with the show for a while All nonsense ofcourse probably just co-incidental but people may spin it that way Touring comics on his scale make a lot more than companion money on DVD sales, merch and tickets. While the Who job will be a good one for him while he can't have gigs, I don't think his business affairs can show much. Folding a business and being skint can be two very, very different things. What's probably more relevant is him having tour dates for sale - and he's touring right from September this year to April 2022. So what that means for Dan leaving, or for the season after S13's filming dates if he is not...is probably more worthwhile to consider.
|
|
|
Post by fitzoliverj on Jan 4, 2021 18:57:17 GMT
Talking of 'sources', *very* interesting article in the Telegraph today. Tim Stanley (in the second half of his Leader) peddles the usual journalistic eighties-who-was-crap-so-they-cancelled-it-line but also blames the current state of the show on fans. Apparently it's all navel-gazing for fans. So, it's all our fault. Chibnall is making the show for us. Even more interestingly, and apparently in the interest of balance (remember that?), the Telegraph has published another journalist's view, taking a pro-Jodie anti-Chibnall position (essentially, Michael Hogan reckons that an actress of Jodie Whittaker's position ought to get out while the getting's good) www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/0/bbc-has-failed-doctor-jodie-whittaker-no-wonder-quitting/
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Jan 4, 2021 20:02:36 GMT
So almost a day and no new word, one way or the other, from the Beeb.
Not saying it's confirmation, but it's still annoyingly vague. However, they have royally dragged their heels before in addressing things like this (remember when we did this same song and dance before S12 aired?) in the past, so I wouldn't be surprised if it's another couple of days before we get something more definite. (If false) Either the PR guys are asleep again, or this is some kind of publicity stunt.
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on Jan 4, 2021 20:44:22 GMT
So still no official word. I think Chibnall is furious, he is good at keeping things quiet & spoiler free so probably wanted to do the same with the next regeneration which would have been nice.
|
|
|
Post by dasmaniac on Jan 4, 2021 21:48:15 GMT
Three seasons seem to be the standard now for each Doctor. A shame the show's grueling production schedule has such an effect on the cast. Is there any way to improve it? Is it a matter of budget?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2021 23:32:20 GMT
So still no official word. I think Chibnall is furious, he is good at keeping things quiet & spoiler free so probably wanted to do the same with the next regeneration which would have been nice. Or he might be enjoying all the free publicity his show is getting, and allowing the wild speculation to continue as long as he can. I wouldn't blame him.
|
|
|
Post by fitzoliverj on Jan 5, 2021 18:48:17 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2021 11:04:43 GMT
As a fan of Doctor Who, I'm naturally going to be defensive of it, but 'insecure, needy and po-faced??' That's three things the Thirteenth Doctor is absolutely not. The Doctor that Marianka Swain seems to want has just been played, by Peter Capaldi. Rather than any repetition of that, Jodie is a completely different Doctor, as she needed to be. Or maybe I'm just speaking from 'the same narrow boys' club of Who superfans!'
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Jan 6, 2021 11:38:14 GMT
The fact that a conservative paper is willing to acknowledge issues around women in television is impressively humble from them. However, I do counter-argue that Swain is overcorrecting here - 13 isn't portrayed as needy, but more emotionally aloof (a trait carried over from 12 and, to an extent, 11. Read autistic coding if you wish) and surely, surely, Swain sees the contradiction of calling 13 'po-faced' AND 'chirpy'. These two don't go together - it's like saying 'stiff and slippery'. The framing of the Doctor 'teaching a valuable lesson' as something exclusive to 13 is just factually wrong, as is the idea that a character's 'power' comes solely from sheer bullish bravado ala Jack. Power can be expressed in other ways.
It's also weird because anytime the Doctor has been framed as 'all-powerful and ruthless', it's always presented as a bad thing and anathema to the character's nature - 10 and 11's god trips, the toll Seven's cosmic manipulations take, even War's civilization destroying decisions in the Time War. Like with Superman, the franchise takes the line of 'even a good person with untamed or unchecked power is a bad thing'. Issues around 13's character would not be fixed if you just made her hyper-competent - that's not complexity either.
As a cap off, Emerald Fennell is a good writer and director who has made a name with interesting female characters (season 2 of Killing Eve, Promising Young Woman) and I wouldn't object to her working on the show, but the odds of her being head of Who are astronomically small: she's very in-demand and is likely overcommitted to projects as is. Plus, why cite her acting credit on Midwife if you want to talk about her writing ability?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2021 11:47:42 GMT
Also - Doctor Who is (to me, at least - other opinions exist!) not the show to intricately examine the female psyche, just as it has never bothered to examine the male psyche over the last fifty years. It's about escapism and adventure. I think, unless the critic is just filling up column space, she is looking for things that have never been there. Today's newspapers - tomorrow's chip paper, and all that.
|
|
|
Post by levi3o4 on Jan 6, 2021 12:06:29 GMT
Also - Doctor Who is (to me, at least - other opinions exist!) not the show to intricately examine the female psyche, just as it has never bothered to examine the male psyche over the last fifty years. It's about escapism and adventure. I think, unless the critic is just filling up column space, she is looking for things that have never been there. Today's newspapers - tomorrow's chip paper, and all that. With respect, I strongly disagree on a factual basis. For one thing, the reviewer doesn't appear to be asking for an intricate examination of the female psyche; rather, she is criticizing the current iteration of the show for failing to portray the Doctor as a well-rounded character, and claims that this deficiency is common among female character written by men. Furthermore, I think it's inaccurate to say that the show has never bothered to examine the male psyche; Moffat often focussed on the Doctor's psychological characteristics and complexities specifically in the context of the Doctor being a man (at the time). And escapism and adventure has never been anathema to dealing with serious themes. The Cartmel era is the go-to example of this, but most of RTD's and Moffat's successes as showrunners involved some engagement with serious themes, explored in interesting ways.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2021 12:27:46 GMT
Also - Doctor Who is (to me, at least - other opinions exist!) not the show to intricately examine the female psyche, just as it has never bothered to examine the male psyche over the last fifty years. It's about escapism and adventure. I think, unless the critic is just filling up column space, she is looking for things that have never been there. Today's newspapers - tomorrow's chip paper, and all that. With respect, I strongly disagree on a factual basis. For one thing, the reviewer doesn't appear to be asking for an intricate examination of the female psyche; rather, she is criticizing the current iteration of the show for failing to portray the Doctor as a well-rounded character, and claims that this deficiency is common among female character written by men. Furthermore, I think it's inaccurate to say that the show has never bothered to examine the male psyche; Moffat often focussed on the Doctor's psychological characteristics and complexities specifically in the context of the Doctor being a man (at the time). And escapism and adventure has never been anathema to dealing with serious themes. The Cartmel era is the go-to example of this, but most of RTD's and Moffat's successes as showrunners involved some engagement with serious themes, explored in interesting ways. All very valid points, for which I thank you, but saying 'having a female lead isn't enough' seems to me that being female should be the focus of the character. I don't agree that being a man was ever the focus of the character before. This is only the my viewpoint, of course, but I felt that Moffat and RTD's focus on our main character was that he/she is an alien, an outsider, irrespective of being male or female. I don't think that any aspect of Doctors 9-12 has been exclusive to men, he could have just as easily been written as a female. My view is that the Doctor is the Doctor, whatever form he/she takes, and has always been written as that, especially from 2005 onward. So I don't see why that should change. The Doctor as a character isn't that interesting, and apart from very occasional comments about the Doctor's gender (notably those of King James, nobly deflected by the Doctor) it doesn't matter that she is female, and more than it 'mattered' that he was male. That, for me, has been one of the strengths of the Chibnall era.
I suppose it all boils down to whether you're a fan of Jodie's Doctor. I think she's rather wonderful. While it might be true to say that at the beginning the character was striving 'to be liked' (although never desperate), but, as was always the plan, I imagine, she has since become somewhat less chirpy and more rounded as her incarnation has grown. But she can't be everything.
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on Jan 6, 2021 16:48:15 GMT
Jodie is out, huh? I wonder if it was the difficulty of filming during COVID, or health problems. I understand that given the show's irregular airings, it's effectively five years of her acting career, not three. It still seems like a rather sudden shift from a seeming I can't even think about leaving yet mentality to allright, I'm out.
|
|
|
Post by antartiks on Jan 6, 2021 21:37:23 GMT
As long as it isn't official, I'm not buying it. And I'm sincerely hoping she's not leaving so soon.
|
|
|
Post by theillusiveman on Jan 6, 2021 23:03:31 GMT
As long as it isn't official, I'm not buying it. And I'm sincerely hoping she's not leaving so soon. If it wasnât happening wouldnât the bbc deny the rumours instead of Saying âno commentâ
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Jan 6, 2021 23:06:23 GMT
Iâd have thought if there was not truth to it at all, the BBC would have come out and said so by now. They bothered to indirectly shutdown the âChaos in Cardiffâ nonsense that made it no further than social media, whereas this has popped up in most newspapers now.
|
|