Doctor Who (Series 9)
#631
Posted 20 July 2009 - 01:57 PM
Nice costume. And rather Troughtonesque, which is good.
Looks like the 'fat' TARDIS has been given a new coat of paint, too.
#632
Posted 20 July 2009 - 03:24 PM
Looks VERY interesting...
I think it suits him.
The trousers bother me to no end in that picture.
#633
Posted 20 July 2009 - 03:32 PM
#634
Posted 20 July 2009 - 04:13 PM
#635
Posted 20 July 2009 - 04:43 PM
Smith looks great though.
#636
Posted 20 July 2009 - 04:47 PM
Wait until you see the context of the episode in question - and what happens to the TARDIS over Christmas (?).I'm not to keen on the look of the exterior TARDIS, it looks too artificial.
#637
Posted 20 July 2009 - 04:52 PM
Dr 11 is a Mod Revivalist from the 80s by the looks of the clobber! I'm assuming he's wearing Docs? HaHAHA nice pun Moffat! Lots of my mates when I was a kid in the 80s wore Docs with the rolled up trousers look - but they were Punks not Mods so I'm guessing Dr 11 is just an all round 80s kind of a guy!
Some very clever stuff here by the Grand Moff - he's bringing in the youngest Dr ever but putting him look-wise smack bang in the pop culture of us old skool fans! Nice!
And the TARDIS - has it got the St John's Badge? Marvellous! It's back to the future for Dr Who!!!
#638
Posted 20 July 2009 - 05:00 PM
Exactly. There's nothing more retrospective than sci-fi. And in citing Matt Smith in perhaps the dullest, allegedly least inspired "look" for any DOCTOR so far, this character not only has a clean slate, he is able to project what he wants onto it - which is the mark of a good actor. But if some people want to get bogged down in "he's too young", then they clearly have a different set of priorities. I don't care. I just want him to be good. And so far, he and Moffat look like they have "got it".Really feeling good about everything I'm seeing here!
Dr 11 is a Mod Revivalist from the 80s by the looks of the clobber! I'm assuming he's wearing Docs? HaHAHA nice pun Moffat! Lots of my mates when I was a kid in the 80s wore Docs with the rolled up trousers look - but they were Punks not Mods so I'm guessing Dr 11 is just an all round 80s kind of a guy!
Some very clever stuff here by the Grand Moff - he's bringing in the youngest Dr ever but putting him look-wise smack bang in the pop culture of us old skool fans! Nice!
And the TARDIS - has it got the St John's Badge? Marvellous! It's back to the future for Dr Who!!!
#639
Posted 20 July 2009 - 05:11 PM
yep yep yep.Exactly. There's nothing more retrospective than sci-fi. And in citing Matt Smith in perhaps the dullest, allegedly least inspired "look" for any DOCTOR so far, this character not only has a clean slate, he is able to project what he wants onto it - which is the mark of a good actor. But if some people want to get bogged down in "he's too young", then they clearly have a different set of priorities. I don't care. I just want him to be good. And so far, he and Moffat look like they have "got it".Really feeling good about everything I'm seeing here!
Dr 11 is a Mod Revivalist from the 80s by the looks of the clobber! I'm assuming he's wearing Docs? HaHAHA nice pun Moffat! Lots of my mates when I was a kid in the 80s wore Docs with the rolled up trousers look - but they were Punks not Mods so I'm guessing Dr 11 is just an all round 80s kind of a guy!
Some very clever stuff here by the Grand Moff - he's bringing in the youngest Dr ever but putting him look-wise smack bang in the pop culture of us old skool fans! Nice!
And the TARDIS - has it got the St John's Badge? Marvellous! It's back to the future for Dr Who!!!
Anyone notice? RIVER Song. Amy POND. Has the Moff got a bit of a waterway fetish? Should we expect a character called DYKE to turn up next season?!
Edited by Sniperscope, 20 July 2009 - 05:11 PM.
#640
Posted 20 July 2009 - 05:12 PM
NOT Amy Pond.... the previous "next DOCTOR's next assistant...." (!)
Here's the press spin on it (or a carefully orchestrated exclusive.....)
http://www.digitalsp...doctor-who.html
I would not discount the coincidence that Matt Smith befriends RIVER SONG and AMY POND in this series.
#641
Posted 20 July 2009 - 05:14 PM
#642
Posted 20 July 2009 - 05:22 PM
Interesting - There's all sorts of continuity questions if he meets River after the SILENCE episodes... she seemed to have known Dr 10 but older, and I'm presuming that she's stuck permanently in the Library's virtual reality computer storage so maybe Dr 11 is going to try to avert that occurring by - deep breath here - meeting her before she meets him before she meets him when he hadn't met her...And his next assistant is already making her presence known....
NOT Amy Pond.... the previous "next DOCTOR's next assistant...." (!)
Here's the press spin on it (or a carefully orchestrated exclusive.....)
http://www.digitalsp...doctor-who.html
I would not discount the coincidence that Matt Smith befriends RIVER SONG and AMY POND in this series.
ooh headache!!!
#643
Posted 20 July 2009 - 05:39 PM
Interesting - There's all sorts of continuity questions if he meets River after the SILENCE episodes... she seemed to have known Dr 10 but older, and I'm presuming that she's stuck permanently in the Library's virtual reality computer storage so maybe Dr 11 is going to try to avert that occurring by - deep breath here - meeting her before she meets him before she meets him when he hadn't met her...And his next assistant is already making her presence known....
NOT Amy Pond.... the previous "next DOCTOR's next assistant...." (!)
Here's the press spin on it (or a carefully orchestrated exclusive.....)
http://www.digitalsp...doctor-who.html
I would not discount the coincidence that Matt Smith befriends RIVER SONG and AMY POND in this series.
ooh headache!!!
Very interesting bit of news. She's a great actress. Often thought she would make a great Miss MoneyPenny.
#644
Posted 21 July 2009 - 08:34 AM
The way I see it, RTD probably made the Doctor a bit too familiar with the audience, with the Northern and Mockney accents of the previous two, as well as their costumes which were both no different than what you might see thousands of blokes wearing in a day. They fitted in a little too well with the plethora of contemporary Earth stories. The romantic angles for both Drs 9 and 10 also made them far too human and familiar to us as viewers.
So it would seem Moffat is going to bring the oddness and alienness that is crucial to the Doctor's character back and I think the costume is the ideal way to start.
It will be very interesting to see Smith's performance... Exciting times!
Edited by Sniperscope, 21 July 2009 - 08:36 AM.
#645
Posted 21 July 2009 - 09:05 AM
Really? I saw it as completely the opposite of that. ROSE TYLER was the audience's anchor in Series One with Eccleston and Tennent certainly exhibiting human/British traits but the eyes and ears of the audience was ROSE, JACKIE, MICKEY and others. I personally think the balance has tipped too far into making everything relevant to a modern day Earth audience (though they are the viewers obviously).One thing this new costume of Smith's makes me think of is that Moffat is definitively reinstating the Doctor as an Outsider with the companion becoming the audience identification figure, rather than the other way round which has been especially noticeable with Tennant.
If anything I would like to see the assistant and DOCTOR get away from equating Earth and its people and cultures to London (as played by Cardiff). It's maybe a bit hokey and could be done wrong but I would like to see an assistant from another era of British history - maybe a seaside smuggler girl from 19th Century Cornwall? (I want to see Cornish smugglers in DOCTOR WHO - don't ask me why!!?)
#646
Posted 21 July 2009 - 11:37 AM
I agree that was the intention in the first new season- ROSE being the first episode makes that clear enough - but don't you think that after Rose left the series has more strongly shifted to an identification with the Doctor? I loved Martha but she seemed to have polarised fandom, and Donna (who I thought was OK on the whole) was in no way "the eyes and ears" of "us". The specials with their tendency towards stunt-casting for companions (they're all name celebrities since Catherine Tate) tends to make the Dr. the audience's anchor now. I'm thinking Moffat wants to reverse that by perhaps going back to what you were saying about Series One (although I really could do without the whole family angle again.)Really? I saw it as completely the opposite of that. ROSE TYLER was the audience's anchor in Series One with Eccleston and Tennent certainly exhibiting human/British traits but the eyes and ears of the audience was ROSE, JACKIE, MICKEY and others. I personally think the balance has tipped too far into making everything relevant to a modern day Earth audience (though they are the viewers obviously).One thing this new costume of Smith's makes me think of is that Moffat is definitively reinstating the Doctor as an Outsider with the companion becoming the audience identification figure, rather than the other way round which has been especially noticeable with Tennant.
In total agreement about Earth=London. How many more alien invasions can we have? A lot of people bash on the Pertwee era because of its Earth-based predictability but I read in one of the ABOUT TIME books that 45% of the New Series is set in contemporary Earth compared to 11% in the old series! I think the notion that we need the Earth to be in catastrophic danger every week to feel it's relevant is way overplayed in the New Series. All of my favourite episodes from the last four years are ones that have been either off-world or more personal in scope.
BTW - wasn't THE SMUGGLERS about Cornish Smugglers?
Edited by Sniperscope, 21 July 2009 - 11:48 AM.
#647
Posted 21 July 2009 - 12:01 PM
I don't agree about Catherine Tate. I think she brought in different viewers and was actually a better actress than Piper or Agyeman (who it doesn't really matter if she polarised the fans - the character worked as did Freema, but only just).
#648
Posted 21 July 2009 - 12:27 PM
#649
Posted 21 July 2009 - 01:01 PM
Maybe. I am not a DOCTOR WHO fan in the classical sense. I have just latched onto the new series with great enthusiasm.
I don't agree about Catherine Tate. I think she brought in different viewers and was actually a better actress than Piper or Agyeman (who it doesn't really matter if she polarised the fans - the character worked as did Freema, but only just).
Well, I'm a fan of the classic series (Pertwee was my favourite Doc until Tennant), but I have to say that I think you're right. The revived series is - and I know it's heresy to say it - much better than the original, in my view, and I happen to agree with you about Tate. I actually liked both Piper and Agyeman, the latter more than the former if truth be known, and my heart sank when I learned about Tate joining the cast. But I thought she was splendid.
#650
Posted 21 July 2009 - 03:01 PM
Well Ms Piper was hardly the best of actresses when she started, but she certainly improved which shows she has it in her. I think the writing slightly let MARTHA JONES down and I genuinely feel they got so much right with DONNA (and there is more to come - including her getting *** ** *** ****** !....apparently).Maybe. I am not a DOCTOR WHO fan in the classical sense. I have just latched onto the new series with great enthusiasm.
I don't agree about Catherine Tate. I think she brought in different viewers and was actually a better actress than Piper or Agyeman (who it doesn't really matter if she polarised the fans - the character worked as did Freema, but only just).
Well, I'm a fan of the classic series (Pertwee was my favourite Doc until Tennant), but I have to say that I think you're right. The revived series is - and I know it's heresy to say it - much better than the original, in my view, and I happen to agree with you about Tate. I actually liked both Piper and Agyeman, the latter more than the former if truth be known, and my heart sank when I learned about Tate joining the cast. But I thought she was splendid.
I actually have my doubts about Mr Moffat. I like his DOCTOR WHO episodes so far but not 100% sure he sees the show as an arc. He cannot do gothic, stand alone episodes based on everyone's fears of the dark ALL the time. I think Davies has a better understanding of how television and audiences work. But I am very prepared to be proved wrong - as I probably will be.
#651
Posted 21 July 2009 - 03:39 PM
I think Moffat has a better grasp of Doctor Who than Davies, though. So, I think (hope) his era's going to be more to my liking than the outgoing one.
They've done that already.(I want to see Cornish smugglers in DOCTOR WHO - don't ask me why!!?)
http://en.wikipedia....i/The_Smugglers
Although the master tapes and telerecordings don't exist anymore, apart from a few brief clips that were recovered from the Australian Film Censorship Office.
#652
Posted 21 July 2009 - 03:50 PM
Apart from the odd episode, I think the new version has been largely bloody awful and not a patch on the original series (pre-JN-T, anyway).
I think Moffat has a better grasp of Doctor Who than Davies, though. So, I think (hope) his era's going to be more to my liking than the outgoing one.They've done that already.(I want to see Cornish smugglers in DOCTOR WHO - don't ask me why!!?)
http://en.wikipedia....i/The_Smugglers
Although the master tapes and telerecordings don't exist anymore, apart from a few brief clips that were recovered from the Australian Film Censorship Office.
Alas as I understand it the same fate befell The Tenth Planet. Only a few clips and stills remain. The audio did, however, survive, somehow. iTunes used to have the radio drama adaptation, which was just the audio of the episode with one of the actors from later series (forget who) narrating the action bits; and I recall reading somewhere that the whole of the original audio, without the narration in places, was somewhere online. Have to say, I quite love that Lost in Time DVD set, and simultaneously I hate it for introducing me to footage from episodes I shall likely never have the pleasure of seeing.
#653
Posted 21 July 2009 - 03:54 PM
Plus....
#654
Posted 21 July 2009 - 03:57 PM
Apart from the odd episode, I think the new version has been largely bloody awful and not a patch on the original series (pre-JN-T, anyway).
I think Moffat has a better grasp of Doctor Who than Davies, though. So, I think (hope) his era's going to be more to my liking than the outgoing one.
Gotta say, VERY strongly disagree, but i thinks its just New DW is so very different to the original, i happen to prefer the style the new one utilises to the one of the original series.
#655
Posted 21 July 2009 - 03:57 PM
#656
Posted 21 July 2009 - 03:59 PM
And perhaps this new one belongs to RIVER SONG who "lends" it back to him indefinitely...??
#657
Posted 21 July 2009 - 04:01 PM
New sonic seems a bit clunky, and yet simultaneously, somewhere in the deep, dark crevices of my mind, an impossibly tiny version of myself is running around frantically and throwing a temper tantrum because it can't have it.
Hmmm. I think it's the same sonic that River Song had in Silence In The Library/Forest Of The Dead, it would make sense for the Doctor to aquire it, CONSIDERING YOU-KNOW-WHAT.
But, yes I agree, I prefer 10's Sonic.
#658
Posted 21 July 2009 - 04:13 PM
bit of a dodgy line of discussion here - comparing the "clunky"ness of one bloke's "sonic" to another. Freud would have had something to say about the Doctor always waving his "screwdriver" around!New sonic seems a bit clunky, and yet simultaneously, somewhere in the deep, dark crevices of my mind, an impossibly tiny version of myself is running around frantically and throwing a temper tantrum because it can't have it.
Hmmm. I think it's the same sonic that River Song had in Silence In The Library/Forest Of The Dead, it would make sense for the Doctor to aquire it, CONSIDERING YOU-KNOW-WHAT.
But, yes I agree, I prefer 10's Sonic.
Well you're comparing chalk and cheese - both incarnations are completely different in the conditions under which they were produced. The original was a serialised programme concieved over 4 or 6 week stories on a crisp packet allowance whereas the new version is a season block of mainly stand-alone episodes, a huge budget (in comparison) and an American-inspired "story-arc" format.Apart from the odd episode, I think the new version has been largely bloody awful and not a patch on the original series (pre-JN-T, anyway).
I think Moffat has a better grasp of Doctor Who than Davies, though. So, I think (hope) his era's going to be more to my liking than the outgoing one.
Gotta say, VERY strongly disagree, but i thinks its just New DW is so very different to the original, i happen to prefer the style the new one utilises to the one of the original series.
It's about as meaningful as comparing 60s WHO to 90s...
Edited by Sniperscope, 21 July 2009 - 04:18 PM.
#659
Posted 21 July 2009 - 04:20 PM
If it doesn't happen it doesn't happen but the chap was so insistent that either I'm very gullible and blindly spreading an utter lie, or ... not.
#660
Posted 21 July 2009 - 04:23 PM