Advertisement
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

General Season 11 / 13th Doctor Discussion

145791034

Comments



  • ebbsy wrote: »
    Death blow for Doctor Who.

    Oh come on. Don't like the choice if you want, but don't bow to hyperbole, just cos a fictional time travelling alien who changes faces, changes to a version you don't approve of.




  • Quite a sensible way to see it.

    Unlike the previously mentioned James Bond whose maleness is so essential to the character that changing that one characteristic would invalidate her/him.

    The only reason I would call the cast of James Bond a gimmick is because of the name James which is a males names and brings up the thought of a man. I also said I would watch the movie to see how the actress would fit in and it could work.

    A female spy I be up for it I think it be a great concept. It was only because of the name James

    The Doctor to me is gender neutral




  • At first the insane reaction from the small few twitter crazies to casting females in popular genre fiction infuriated me.

    Now I just find it kind of absurdly funny, with a hint of pity.

    Doctor Who will survive and continue to thrive.




  • At first the insane reaction from the small few twitter crazies to casting females in popular genre fiction infuriated me.

    Now I just find it kind of absurdly funny, with a hint of pity.

    Some of the reactions I hope is sarcasm or wums, otherwise they are genuinely scarey


  • Advertisement


  • CastorTroy wrote: »
    Pretty sure it was a man playing the Doctor in the last season

    Apparently it's not just a female Doctor some object to, it's women in general doing anything.




  • At first the insane reaction from the small few twitter crazies to casting females in popular genre fiction infuriated me.

    Now I just find it kind of absurdly funny, with a hint of pity.

    Doctor Who will survive and continue to thrive.

    I think the show has been slowly dying for a while now, or struggling at least. I follow quite a few hardcore Doctor Who fans on twitter and they've all been almost grudge watching the last few series, not because of cast, but because of the writing and general running of the show. I think the fact that there's a whole new production team on board as well as a new Doctor and presumably companion, will inject new life into the show.




  • Yes I think James Bond as a woman would be a gimmick but I would still watch to see if it was any good and make a decision to see if it would fit.
    Jesus Part Deux.
    But your stance of oh its a woman so be crap has to be a man and not watching to find out is crazy
    She might be good, she might be crap, she'll never be Doctor Who in my eyes anyway. As I said it's an example of a) a gimmick to attempt to save an ailing show that's haemorrhaging viewer figures and b) the BBC playing the Oh look how progressive we are card.
    But hey your choice. Just do not det defensive when people point it out
    Point away.
    snowflaker wrote: »
    Why does the doctor have to be a man?
    Always has been a male character. One of the vanishingly few that didn't rely on his fists to be the hero. And yes I firmly believe boys/young men need such a character now more than ever. Just taking Doctor Who in the last few years there have been repeated little digs at being male along the way. You don't think kids miss that kinda thing? If the reverse was happening with young girls like it stupidly did in the past we'd be rightfully up in arms about it. But apparently it's OK when that's in reverse. Cool beans.
    Ay right. People have different opinions to yours. Best to ridicule......
    Where pray tell did I "ridicule"? Go ahead Ted, point it out. Though I'm apparently "crazy", "defensive" and latterly a "broflake".
    CastorTroy wrote:
    Pretty sure it was a man playing the Doctor in the last season
    Who was hoping the future was female. With a few other examples of "men a bit silly/women great". It's quite the theme of late.
    Apparently it's not just a female Doctor some object to, it's women in general doing anything.
    Wow that's a leap that would make an olympic long jumper proud. For me lest there is any confusion it's just a female Doctor Who.

    Few enough were innocent in the past, few enough are innocent in the present, we just don’t know why yet.





  • Dont know anything about her but she cant be any worse than Capaldi.




  • I think the show has been slowly dying for a while now, or struggling at least. I follow quite a few hardcore Doctor Who fans on twitter and they've all been almost grudge watching the last few series, not because of cast, but because of the writing and general running of the show. I think the fact that there's a whole new production team on board as well as a new Doctor and presumably companion, will inject new life into the show.

    Yeah i have to admit i haven't been as impressed with capaldis era even though i love the characters all individually


  • Advertisement


  • Lol the dramatics of it all
    Never be the doctor
    Go way outta that




  • I'll give it a chance, but at the same time I've been losing interest in DW over the last 2 or 3 seasons and I can't see this move holding my interest past the first few episodes, but as I said I'll give it a chance.




  • Wibbs wrote: »

    Wow that's a leap that would make an olympic long jumper proud. For me lest there is any confusion it's just a female Doctor Who.

    Except the original comment you made was about them "playing up to gender" and that kind of "nonsense" so it seems you have an issue with something other than the new Doctor.




  • Just because something has been "always that way" in the past, doesn't mean it cannot change in the future.

    For Sci-fi "anything is possible"- except the doctor's gender changing when regenerated seems pretty petty




  • Except the original comment you made was about them "playing up to gender" and that kind of "nonsense" so it seems you have an issue with something other than the new Doctor.

    He was make wild assumptions- you cannot




  • Is it so wrong to think you can tell boys that women can be role models too? Or is it because they don't have the correct genitalia, they are automatically discarded as role models?




  • They must be trying to kill it off.




  • Wibbs wrote: »
    Jesus Part Deux.

    She might be good, she might be crap, she'll never be Doctor Who in my eyes anyway. As I said it's an example of a) a gimmick to attempt to save an ailing show that's haemorrhaging viewer figures and b) the BBC playing the Oh look how progressive we are card.

    Point away.


    Always has been a male character. One of the vanishingly few that didn't rely on his fists to be the hero. And yes I firmly believe boys/young men need such a character now more than ever. Just taking Doctor Who in the last few years there have been repeated little digs at being male along the way. You don't think kids miss that kinda thing? If the reverse was happening with young girls like it stupidly did in the past we'd be rightfully up in arms about it. But apparently it's OK when that's in reverse. Cool beans.

    Where pray tell did I "ridicule"? Go ahead Ted, point it out. Though I'm apparently "crazy", "defensive" and latterly a "broflake".

    Who was hoping the future was female. With a few other examples of "men a bit silly/women great". It's quite the theme of late.

    Wow that's a leap that would make an olympic long jumper proud. For me lest there is any confusion it's just a female Doctor Who.



    Why Jesus part Deux.

    Why is it a gimmick. Why cant it be the casting going maybe we could go for a woman this time as The Doctor. People like Missy so it could work. Could that not have happened. If BBC were doing something like this to save the figures of Doctor Who why would they take the risky decision of changing The Doctor to a female. People who have never seen Doctor Who will not now suddenly start watching because its a woman.

    You been defensive well that GIF of futurama.




  • bluewolf wrote: »
    Yeah i have to admit i haven't been as impressed with capaldis era even though i love the characters all individually

    I was a fan of Jenna Coleman before she was on DW and only sort of got into DW through her. I wasn't overly keen on Matt Smith as the Doctor but when they announced Capaldi was coming on board I kept watching. I absolutely loved how Coleman/Capaldi bounced off each other, I thought they had brilliant chemistry as actors, but the overall story lines were very messy, it always felt like it didn't make any kind of sense and Mofatt didn't have a tight reign over what he was doing.

    I'll give it a chance, but at the same time I've been losing interest in DW over the last 2 or 3 seasons and I can't see this move holding my interest past the first few episodes, but as I said I'll give it a chance.

    Again I think the fact that there's been changes behind the scenes too could help with this. There's not just a new Doctor, it's almost like a reboot, if you like. Of course it could still be terrible, who knows, but I'm quite hopeful.




  • Lord TSC wrote: »
    Is it so wrong to think you can tell boys that women can be role models too? Or is it because they don't have the correct genitalia, they are automatically discarded as role models?

    Depends on how one views women themselves. How you view and treat others is ultimately a reflection of yourself


  • Advertisement


  • I thought, and I might be wrong, that the Doctor being a weird alien who isnt interested in humans in a sexual way was all part of the comedy, from Matt Smith making childish comments about reproduction to David Tenants platonic love for Rose etc.

    So the doctors gender makes no difference as he/she is fundamentally indifferent to humans sexually.

    And the fact that hed been a woman before was well flagged IIRC.

    The only interesting thing arising from the gender issue will be the companion interactions. There was some criticism from feminists that the doctor exemplified an old patriarchy stereotype of the older experienced man guiding the younger, sometimes hapless, female companion. Will the new doctor have a male or female companion? Will the dynamic change?

    I think its far more interesting than Malcom Tucker playing a slightly tuned out elderly doctor.




  • The only interesting thing arising from the gender issue will be the companion interactions. There was some criticism from feminists that the doctor exemplified an old patriarchy stereotype of the older experienced man guiding the younger, sometimes hapless, female companion. Will the new doctor have a male or female companion? Will the dynamic change?

    I wonder if Kris Marshall will be the new companion? His name was being thrown around an awful lot, you have to assume there was a reason for that.

    I do wonder if that was Moffat and co. and if the BBC wanted to go with someone else do Moffat left?




  • Lord TSC wrote: »
    Is it so wrong to think you can tell boys that women can be role models too? Or is it because they don't have the correct genitalia, they are automatically discarded as role models?

    If anything, the reaction of the loud few angry Internet men is proof of why young boys should probably be given a few more role models among the other 50% of the world's population.




  • bluewolf wrote: »
    Lol the dramatics of it all
    Never be the doctor
    Go way outta that
    "Dramatics" now eh? From my reading it's others falling over themselves to be Right On about the whole thing.

    So nope, merely a statement of my feelings on the matter. As for clawing back the drop in ratings? I suspect an initial curiosity followed by an even more parlous fall in the ratings. The Fonz has just strapped on his water skis.
    Except the original comment you made was about them "playing up to gender" and that kind of "nonsense" so it seems you have an issue with something other than the new Doctor.
    I have an issue with hamfisted gender politicking by the Beeb. End of.
    Lord TSC wrote:
    Is it so wrong to think you can tell boys that women can be role models too? Or is it because they don't have the correct genitalia, they are automatically discarded as role models?
    You can "tell them" all you like, but if they're getting a drip drip of "men a bit silly/women always great" you don't think that has an effect? Really? Cast your mind back when women in most media were very rarely heroes and mostly either damsels in distress or comic relief or morality themes dressed up all nice and would you have told young women "Is it so wrong to think you can tell girls that men can be role models too?". I doubt it and you'd be dead right.

    Few enough were innocent in the past, few enough are innocent in the present, we just don’t know why yet.





  • These broflakes are delicious




  • Hot blonde woman used as a marketing device is how I see it going forward myself.




  • If anything, the reaction of the loud few angry Internet men is proof of why young boys should probably be given a few more role models among the other 50% of the world's population.
    OK then, name a few positive non violent leading male role models in their own series in current media, in TV or film. The list of women who fulfil that is a long one(add in the Buffy style tiny women who are physically invincible). Actually don't bother. Pointless.
    snowflaker wrote:
    These broflakes are delicious
    Riveting response altogether.

    Few enough were innocent in the past, few enough are innocent in the present, we just don’t know why yet.





  • snowflaker wrote: »
    These broflakes are delicious

    Do you actually watch the show?




  • Do you actually watch the show?

    On occasion

    (Waits for "you don't even go here" gif)


  • Advertisement


  • Dr Who has been 'dying' since Eccleston left in 2005. It has been at deaths door after every companion departure, regeneration, production team change, ratings dip, or whatever the hell people decided was the definitive time the show was on the way out. I swear there's no other show with such an ethusiastically pessimistic fandom. Do trekkies get off on declaring the show dead, but this time they mean it?

    So here comes the latest: the actor swaps gender and suddenly this! THIS is the moment the show tanked because its audience of predominantly CHILDREN won't cope with their favourite show being led by a woman! All that merchandising and overseas success will shrivel because this bastion of male heroism has succumbed to that most deadly of threats to civilisation .... gender politics.

    And hey, who knows maybe 10 seasons in, the show needs a rest, lord knows it has got a bit stale: but honstly it has got tedious reading and listening to every change being greeted with salacious determination that now was the time the show would die.


Advertisement