nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Doctor Who Season 10 [ Spoilers ]

Mr E

Starts April 15th. Trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2xOQK_BLIg

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

pixelburp

I realise now you did say you had seen the finale, so ignore my own comment lol.

Yeah, agree on the above, though part 1 of the finale (episode 11) is worth watching - IMO much better than the followup and one of the strongest, legitimately creepiest Cyberman stories out there. Definitely one that captured the body horror aspect (insofar as tea time telly allows).

FunLover18

OU812 wrote: »

OK lads & lasses. I've three episodes from the last season I haven't seen (have seen the finale), didn't watch them because the season didn't grip me a lot & had other stuff to watch. Question is whether I need to binge them before next week?

You've seen the finale so you haven't seen 9, 10 or 11? I wouldn't bother, bit weird that you didn't seen the first part of the finale but I don't think there's anything of relevance. Empress of Mars is very poor and Eaters of Light is a good standalone.

pixelburp

OU812 wrote: »

OK lads & lasses. I've three episodes from the last season I haven't seen (have seen the finale), didn't watch them because the season didn't grip me a lot & had other stuff to watch. Question is whether I need to binge them before next week?

The Xmas episode looks to pick up from the finale so I'd say yeah, best to get through them so the tables are set for you, so to speak...

OU812

OK lads & lasses. I've three episodes from the last season I haven't seen (have seen the finale), didn't watch them because the season didn't grip me a lot & had other stuff to watch. Question is whether I need to binge them before next week?

pixelburp

A 2 minute clip from the Xmas Special was released during Children in Need tonight; it's nothing too spoilery, just a bit of banter in the TARDIS between Doctors

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIHIyuVK9uA

Busi_Girl08

Doctor DooM wrote: »

Yeah the Doctor often hallucinates during regeneration, 12 would probably see Clara, as those neurons fire and him forgetting her "heals". they could leave it up to our imagination if it's real or not

for the first time I nearly wrote 13 instead of 12 there

She came up in his "Doctor" moment just before Bill's magical tear brought him back to life. She's still there unconsciously I think. Which would explain why he still he remembers her song. Kind of like when Rory was wiped out and she was crying for him without realising.

Doctor DooM

Busi_Girl08 wrote: »

I would be amazed if
she didn't make an appearance. It would be even more poignant if she was saying goodbye to the Doctor, or guiding him to his regeneration, while on her final journey to Gallifrey to finish her cycle and face her death.

Yeah the Doctor often hallucinates during regeneration, 12 would probably see Clara, as those neurons fire and him forgetting her "heals". they could leave it up to our imagination if it's real or not

for the first time I nearly wrote 13 instead of 12 there

Busi_Girl08

RopeDrink wrote: »

Trailer didn't actually do much for me. In addition, I both love and hate that 1st (Hartnell) to 1st (Bradley) merge.

a) It's nice that they keep acknowledging the fact that the 1st is played by someone else now. Hartnell's portrayal will always be remembered and I'm sure there are people out there who find it difficult to see past it and give Bradley the reigns fully, so it's a tip of the hat without forgetting the past. Having said that, I think we can all assume that (aside from possible sporadic appearance potential) this is likely a once-off deal for Bradley.

b) But it's so blatantly CGI looking and having gone through a lot of the Tenth Planet after the previous finale episode where Bill first became a Cyberman, I know why it looks off - the background/set being different.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBHGbBJwyh0

Either way, no doubt I'll be checking in to see how it pans out... But yes, they really do love undermining their own hype potential by spoiling everything in advance. Pearl's popularity as Bill was always a bit topsy-turvy but fans would have probably appreciated her appearance being a surprise. Also unsure if true or just pot-stirring but YouTube comments on that trailer keep going on about
Clara will be included seeing as the actress has been supposedly signed for the special - which, to me, seems like a brief goodbye scene, probably similar to Amy/11th
- or it could be a load of ole cobblers.

I would be amazed if

she didn't make an appearance. It would be even more poignant if she was saying goodbye to the Doctor, or guiding him to his regeneration, while on her final journey to Gallifrey to finish her cycle and face her death.

Penn

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Yeah I Think BBC actually have a Spoiler division team who's job it is to ruin everything.

Soaps are the worst for it. I can't understand why my mother and sisters watch them when they spend half the episode talking about what's going to happen in the next few episodes.

The_Valeyard

Busi_Girl08 wrote: »

Brilliant trailer, and I'm looking forward to Christmas, but once again,
could they cool it with the spoiler reveals months before the episode? It would have been nicer to have been surprised by Bill's return.

Yeah I Think BBC actually have a Spoiler division team who's job it is to ruin everything.

Daledge

I'm more pissed off about all the spoiler reveals than I am about a female doctor. Literally don't know any other show that does it and it's a terrible, terrible marketing ploy. People are going to watch it whether they know that, for example, the master is in a certain episode or not, but they'd enjoy it so much more if they were genuinely surprised. It's actually having the opposite effect on me - I'm considering stopping watching because I already know the main plot points and biggest twists before they even unfold. It makes it boring.

I mean just imagine the effect it would have had if we hadn't known

Simms

was going to be in the recent episode, it would have been one of the best moments of New Who without a shadow of a doubt.

Can sort of understand announcing the next doctor being female prior to the episode as it might take a while for some fans to adjust but I know personally I'd prefer to find out live. It just adds so much more to the show.

Take Game of Thrones for example. NOBODY (apart from book readers, obviously) saw

Ned's death

or the

Red Wedding

coming and it was absolutely astounding, while also gut-wrenching, to watch it happen. Twists like these are what make great shows great and I think Who would be so much better than it already is if it followed suit.

For those who are going to say "Just don't watch the trailers", I don't. But it gets spoiled on every form of social media because they give so much away in the trailers and announcements.

Busi_Girl08

Brilliant trailer, and I'm looking forward to Christmas, but once again,

could they cool it with the spoiler reveals months before the episode? It would have been nicer to have been surprised by Bill's return.

pixelburp

From comic con, a trailer for the Xmas episode has been released :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNx9bzq1p4g

Angron

I've never seen Broadchurch, so I have no idea what she's like. However, I'm hopeful it'll be good, and I'm also hopeful the seasons get a bit more consistency that I felt they were lacking under Moffat.

CramCycle

We could all just watch an episode first and see what she is like. Seems an odd thing to do, condemn here without having any knowledge of if she will be good or not.

Eccelston - thought would be good but never enjoyed
Tennant - knew nothing about him but loved him
Smith - excited before but he took awhile to grow on me
Capaldi - very excited but the writing really was a disappointment for me, nothing wrong with him though.
Jodie Whittaker - I only know here from Broadchurch and there was little there to set my world alight but then again, as with the previous, judging her before she makes it to the screen seems a bit silly.

WomanSkirtFan8

Doctor DooM wrote: »

It's quite interesting that this is the first time in the new Who Run we're seeing Who being "ruined forever". Happens all the time in other franchises, but up to this point Who seems to have been immune (perhaps because of the older fanbase).

I wonder if it's arising now because of the maturity of the new series.

Quite possibly. For me personally, I love this choice. TBCH the whole "will never watch DW again", or "DW has been ruined forever" or "not my doctor" is completely utter rubbish. DW has NOT been ruined. It's just evolved into another dimension if you like.

One should applaude the BBC for having the balls to actually do this, not condemn them for doing so.

Doctor DooM

pixelburp wrote: »

Dr. Who's eternal circling of the drain started approx. 1966 when William Hartnell stepped down; I suspect it will outlast this current controversy in some way shape or form; honestly there's no need to be reaching for conclusions using pejoratives either.

And really, the two hiatuses taken since the relaunch would imply the opposite to me: better for a creative team to take a break from an intensive production than constantly churning out season-after-season of entertainment. TBH, more channels & shows could benefit from a hiatus now & then.

What's the worst that can happen anyway? Cancellation? C'mon people, any other show that might be a viable outcome, but we're talking about arguably the most flexible TV show in pop culture that has run for 50 years by being able to change with the times. More likely worst outcome would be another hiatus, Whittaker stepping down and the Doctor regenerating again. There is no bell here that can't be un-rung.

It's quite interesting that this is the first time in the new Who Run we're seeing Who being "ruined forever". Happens all the time in other franchises, but up to this point Who seems to have been immune (perhaps because of the older fanbase).

I wonder if it's arising now because of the maturity of the new series.

pixelburp

Dr. Who's eternal circling of the drain started approx. 1966 when William Hartnell stepped down; I suspect it will outlast this current controversy in some way shape or form; honestly there's no need to be reaching for conclusions using pejoratives either.

And really, the two hiatuses taken since the relaunch would imply the opposite to me: better for a creative team to take a break from an intensive production than constantly churning out season-after-season of entertainment. TBH, more channels & shows could benefit from a hiatus now & then.

What's the worst that can happen anyway? Cancellation? C'mon people, any other show that might be a viable outcome, but we're talking about arguably the most flexible TV show in pop culture that has run for 50 years by being able to change with the times. More likely worst outcome would be another hiatus, Whittaker stepping down and the Doctor regenerating again. There is no bell here that can't be un-rung.

tritium

Wibbs wrote: »

I hear that.

It is a huge money spinner for them T and was even moreso in the earlier New Who. Second only to Top Gear in international sales for a single series, at times higher than their natural world stuff. It is their "big three", Doctor Who, Top Gear and Nature Documentaries. They value it hugely in those terms. I'd reckon they value it even more since the Top Gear debacle. Indeed, many within and without the Beeb complained about how much of the budget it was getting over other projects. The Late AA Gill used to regularly rant about it and I suspect his disdain for the series sprang from that. I don't really need to suspect as he wrote that in plain view and how people he knew within the biz were of the same mind and that he would have given it a fairer shake of critique if it hadn't been sucking so much investment.

Now it has been faltering in direct sales since the middle of Smith's Doc and really looked like a depreciating asset in Capaldi's tenure, but is still a strong moneymaker for the BBC. It's how they handle such a property is the thing and the Beeb can be a bit shortsighted in this. The Top Gear loss an obvious one(Clarkson was a prize arsehole in that, but they could have handled it far better).

Oh i dont doubt its valuable wibbs, but make no mistake the beeb has for a very long time had some sort of conceptual issue with dr who. Whether it was michael grade doing his damdest to cancel the original show (an awful little twerp of a man who seems to think everyone should like what he did, he also cancelled the tripods), or the current attempts to make it an ideologocal vehicle for certain beeb execs while throwing in the odd 12 month hiatus when it suits and expecring the fans to suck it up.

There is imho a real danger that the latter group will drive fans away and lead to the shows demise. Sadly the gob****e idealogues will likely put it down to some failing or immaturity on the fans part rather than how they ****ed up the goose that laid many golden eggs

Wibbs

tritium wrote: »

Im going to separate my feelings towards the beeb and the why they're going this way imho (and the very negative message it sends to a particular demographic)

I hear that.

I dont think the beeb has ever really cherished the Dr Who brand (or at least not since several years before the original incarnation was pulled).

It is a huge money spinner for them T and was even moreso in the earlier New Who. Second only to Top Gear in international sales for a single series, at times higher than their natural world stuff. It is their "big three", Doctor Who, Top Gear and Nature Documentaries. They value it hugely in those terms. I'd reckon they value it even more since the Top Gear debacle. Indeed, many within and without the Beeb complained about how much of the budget it was getting over other projects. The Late AA Gill used to regularly rant about it and I suspect his disdain for the series sprang from that. I don't really need to suspect as he wrote that in plain view and how people he knew within the biz were of the same mind and that he would have given it a fairer shake of critique if it hadn't been sucking so much investment.

Now it has been faltering in direct sales since the middle of Smith's Doc and really looked like a depreciating asset in Capaldi's tenure, but is still a strong moneymaker for the BBC. It's how they handle such a property is the thing and the Beeb can be a bit shortsighted in this. The Top Gear loss an obvious one(Clarkson was a prize arsehole in that, but they could have handled it far better).

tritium

flazio wrote: »

Best of luck to her.
I'm not going to be upset, angry, over joyed or anything. Just intrigued.

Im going to separate my feelings towards the beeb and the why they're going this way imho (and the very negative message it sends to a particular demographic)

I hope the new doctor turns out to be a good one. More importantly i hope the writing is better than some of what their predecessors have had to work with- some fine episodes at times mind, but i cant help feel they were often let down by the scripts.

I dont think the beeb has ever really cherished the Dr Who brand (or at least not since several years before the original incarnation was pulled). Hopefully they feel strongly enough about going this way to change that and make it what it should be. Im not sure that fans will be particularly forgiving if they dont.

8mv

Belle E. Flops wrote: »

The 13th Doctor has been revealed.

Great! I like Jodi Whittaker. So the Chris Chibnall connection proved important after all.

flazio

Best of luck to her.
I'm not going to be upset, angry, over joyed or anything. Just intrigued.

Belle E. Flops

The 13th Doctor has been revealed.

FunLover18

The new Doctor will be revealed on Sunday.

Das Kitty

I had myself convinced there'd be a twist at the end of the last two episodes where the "Simulated" universe of earlier in the series would be brought back in.

I thought the idea would be to safely test Missy to see if she could ever really be rehabilitated.

I knew we were in for a new Doctor, so in my head, the simulation would reveal she can be a better person, then the Doctor would release her full of hope for his old chum, and she'd execute him.

CramCycle

Ate we allowed speculate on stories?

An interesting, though likely impossible to pull off twist would be for Capaldi to regenerate into the first doctor, get killed like the first regeneration, creating a loop of doctors, letting the first doctor go off.

Not sure what the point would be but it would be a head melter to figure out.

Memory could be explained by not being allowed know about future events you haven't gotten to yet in your own timeline

pixelburp

I think what also helped with Eccles' regeneration was that at that point, there was nothing at stake as such; the 2005 series (sidebar, holy god, the new series is 12 years old) was a total unknown quantity and while it quickly became a hit, it never got the chance to ramp up to the degree that occurred during the Tennant year. Eccleston started the ball rolling, but it was David Tennant who took a show still pretty much in gestation, and put the foot down. To me, that felt like the highest / loudest point of Who obsession, and by the time Tennant hung up his sonic screwdriver it was arguably peak Who at that point.

So in that respect, RTD let that groundswell of enthusiasm for Tennant get the best of him, manifesting in a regeneration that was mawkish and overlong; it wasn't so much a clean slate for the next guy coming along, insofar as an extended parade around the stadium (when you look back at Series 5, Moffat had a LOT to address really, it's no wonder he reset the Big Bang!). And while the Xmas 2017 episode may yet be guilty of all those same beats, it's interesting how Moffat has at least made an attempt to clear the decks for Chibnall.

Wibbs

My fave would be Ecclestone into Tennant. Love the "new teeth? That weird".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa3NM9Jhkn0

No long winded run up to it, no massive changes beyond him and done and dusted, straight into the new with the shock of the change well handled(again IMHO though plots could be well variable, the characterisation writing was better in the early days) and again done and dusted within an episode. For my money it was the cleanest of the new Who by a country mile. The next two were longwinded and portentous and overly dramatic. More about the production team/showrunner/actors background stuff and pandering to the more nerdy fans.

It "helped" that Eccy had dropped the I'm leaving bomb on them, so they had less time and less baggage to contend with in the first season and there was no change of background actors and writers and team, so no reason to go for a dramatic bow out/sour the milk for the next.

corkie

doctor-who-regeneration-1963-2013_creation