New Dr. Who: now they've done it!

[palitoy]

For me personally, I still love most of the classic series.

I've discovered I'm an incredible nerd for the extras on the classic DVDs, my wife came home to me watching an interview with the set designer on "Keys of Marinus" the other day. I have a problem.

[Mikey]

I'm kind of the opposite.

I do watch the extra's SOMETIMES, but more often I pass them by unless they interest me ... Like on the Frontier In Space DVD, I loved the Roger Delgado biography.

[Gorn Captain]

To me, Doctor Who has a sort of innocence to it.
Sure there can be affection, like Ace and Sylvester McCoy had a good, affectionate chemistry, and I liked it that Rose became the one companion that would make the Doctor say "I love you", but that was enough for me. So yes, he's emotional, yes he needs companions, but "get on this bed and bang me!", nah, that's not the reason why I watch the show.
It's a style breach.
No big deal, that's just the way I enjoy the show.

I see no reason why a male companion couldn't work again. Jamie was, to me, one of the best. I miss that, and I miss the "older man" Doctor.
I feel we'd had enough "sexual innuendo" with Captain Shag, I mean Jack.

[palitoy]

If Amy tries to jump his bones for the next eight episodes, I won't like it either. I'm hopeful they're just getting the issue out of the way, mostly because they played it for laughs.

If they do get another guy on the Tardis, it will hopefully be without a love triangle.

[samurainoir]

They could solve this 'problem' (or not, and PO even more people) by making the Doctor's Companion male for once. I liked Harry what's-his-face from the early Tom Baker years. In my memory he looks like a brown-haired Chief O'Brien.

How soon they forget!


How many companions have had a bit of a snog with the Doctor?

Look at the credits of Queer as Folk and compare them to Doctor Who. Chief amongst them RTD!

[ctc]

Hmmmm....

I got the impression with the new one that they wanted to deepen the character part of things with the new show; and romantic entanglement is the old saw. I didn't mind it, but I think if you keep doing it you run the risk of making the Doctor some kind of cosmic lothario. But that's the same problem I have with most shows; they ALWAYS have a romantic subplot, and it ALWAYS cheapens what they've done in the past. (And it always seems to happen for no real reason....) Since the Doctor isn't human though, maybe it's some sort of instinct for the Doctor, like with Vulcans.... Gallifreyans only mate once their species is near extinction? (It'd explain why they're all so uptight.)

Don C.

[palitoy]

they ALWAYS have a romantic subplot

I think the comic book movie is the worst example anymore.

I've always had the feeling the Doctor is somewhat beyond relationships now. He must have had a past prior to the series. i don't have an issue with him being beyond romance, it kind of makes sense. I just do think people would throw themselves at him.

[jds1911a1]

How soon they forget!

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e345/LittleJoesMistress/Torchwood/captain_jack_harkness.jpg

How many companions have had a bit of a snog with the Doctor?

Look at the credits of Queer as Folk and compare them to Doctor Who. Chief amongst them RTD!

the same can be said for JNT and it is often the joke about his costumeing for Teagan and Nyssa

[jds1911a1]

I still remember many of the fans back in the 80's who used to say Susan cannot be the Doctor's true grand daughter becauce he doesn't and wouldn't have sex ... Like he's some sort of robot.

They must have never seen William Hartnell in the Aztecs

back then they probably hadn't I didn't see most hartnells till video

[jds1911a1]

And while that worked for the most part because the Doctor was often older or as it's been well put awkward (totally agree on the Tom Baker thing). It fell flat in the Davison years where he's got a gang of young people that look up to him yet none of them develop any sort of feelings? Even unrequited? I find that more unbelievable than the Tardis.

The best relationship in the classic, IMO was Doctor/Ace, while not romantic, it had more depth and realism than 90% of it's predecessors.

I don't think this sort of character "reduces" anything, I'd only think it did if he hopped into bed with them or did something out of character. This current Doctor might be the least "lovey dovey" we've seen in a long time.

I can't take credit for the akward observation, Tom states it that way on a commentary or it's a liner note (I think for City of Death)

Loise Jameson put it best in a Multi colour swap shop clip at the beginnig of The Face of evil VHS. "A bit of Jiggle for the dads"

[jds1911a1]

They could solve this 'problem' (or not, and PO even more people) by making the Doctor's Companion male for once. I liked Harry what's-his-face from the early Tom Baker years. In my memory he looks like a brown-haired Chief O'Brien.

Sullivan - the late Ian Marter (first Who appearance is as the steam ship first officer in Carnival if Monsters) also wrote novellisations for target later. He was cast before Tom was (at the time they were thinking an older less robust actor might be the Doctor according to the commentary on robot or genesis of the daleks I can't recall which) and once Tom was cast he was redundant hence the penchant to make him clumsy

[ctc]

>i don't have an issue with him being beyond romance, it kind of makes sense.

Yeah. I think that'd be cool 'cos it'd be.... different from everything else. I hate how everything HAS to be the same, and everyone jumps on whatever the current "right" way of doing it.

>I just do think people would throw themselves at him.

Kinda like that. Sure they would; but I think people would do a LOT of things.... there'd be some fear, jealousy (like Mickey), some would see him as a challenge or an adversary of sorts. (Like Ace.) In the post-Twilight era, the "OMG, you're SOOOOOOO dreamy......!" thing is gaining prevalence amongst the nerdly arts. Whihc may be a step up from the preceeding "GRRRR! I'm ANGRY!!!!" thing.... or a step back. (Sideways maybe?)

At any rate; what I hate is that everything has to be so standardized. The Doctor's companions offer a chance to see how the Doc reacts to different types; but they seldom seem to take advantage of it. In the olden days it was so's to not crowd out the story; which (more than characters) was the focus. But if you're gonna get into the character bit more, why not shake it up?

What the Doctor REALLY needs is a Viking companion. Prefferably played by Brian Blessed.

Don C.

[YANOULI]

Sullivan - the late Ian Marter (first Who appearance is as the steam ship first officer in Carnival if Monsters) also wrote novellisations for target later. He was cast before Tom was (at the time they were thinking an older less robust actor might be the Doctor according to the commentary on robot or genesis of the daleks I can't recall which) and once Tom was cast he was redundant hence the penchant to make him clumsy

At one point, Bernard Cribbins ( who played Donna's grandad Wilfred ) was in the running for the 4th Doctor.

Personally i don't see a problem with Amy throwing herself at the Doctor.
She'd just been through a traumatic experience ( almost dying ), was a few hours from getting married and possibly never seeing again the man who had been a major part of her life for the last 14 years, who she was clearly obsessed with.

Now, thoughts on who the man River Killed turns out to be

[YANOULI]

Every single story over 4 episodes long would benefit being chopped down to 4 imo

I agree.

The 2 Hartnell Dalek stories, The Aztecs, War Games, The Invasion, Dinosaur Invasion, planet of the spiders, Silurians, Sea Devils, planet of the Daleks and Genesis of the Daleks could all do with losing a couple of episodes and it wouldn't make any difference to the stories as alot of it is just padding.

[spamn]

Now, thoughts on who the man River Killed turns out to be

I'm betting it's the Doctor, somehow.