Doctor Who news from the past week is the focus of this podcast, including more missing episodes rumours.
From Steven Moffat’s unusual comment about the Doctor not referring to himself as the “nth” (no one said he did, did they?!) to the recent Peter Capaldi interview in the Sunday Times Magazine, Christian Cawley, James McLean and Brian Terranova cover a lot of ground and share their thoughts about these and many more topics.
Recording this on Monday afternoon, the heat possibly played a part in some… confused comments from both Christian and James. We’ll say it was the heat, anyway, and hope it was nothing to do with some saddening reliance on ginger beer.
So, with all this in mind, it’s time to hit play!
Shownotes
- Also: Kelvin Tsang’s IMDb entry for the 2005 Doctor Who: Children in Need Special
- Recommendations: Thor: The Dark World
(Christopher Eccleston), The War Games
, Who: 1999 and Doctor Who Intro Space: 1999 style (fan-made series openings, Space: 1999 style.)
Get in touch
If you subscribe to our podcast, please head to Apple Podcasts to leave a rating and review. Any new reviews will be read out.
Not on Apple Podcasts? Leave us a review somewhere else, send the link over on Twitter or Facebook or podkasterborous@gmail.com, and you’ll get a mention.
Argh! Who’s constantly jangling their keys on the microphone??
Keys? How far through?
sounds like something plastic like poker chips or something…
I thought it was one of my cats locked in a cupboard. I’ve been shouting “Jaspie, Jens…where are you…” for the last 2 minutes!!!
You tread a nice line between not bitching about the show and not blowing smoke up the production team’s bumhole, guys.
I think Moffat artificially advanced the end of the regen cycle so that he could be the one who provided the solution which only a genius writer could come up with – that the Time Lords would just hand the Doctor a new regen cycle on a plate. Who saw that coming?
Yes, a lot of fans would want to be the one who “solved” the regen cycle but haven’t we all been arguing ever since 2005 that that’s why you don’t let fans write DW? You get proper writers.
I liked John Hurt’s performance, but I’ll give voice to the undefended position of not liking the existence of an extra doctor, and not just for the numbering thing. Which does annoy me, I admit.
But my real objection comes from the fact that if the ninth doctor wouldn’t return, the eighth doctor would have been the perfect war doctor. (It is extremely possible that Paul McGann wouldn’t have come either, but they could have tried…for all I know, they did.) There’s some excellent groundwork laid in Big Finish for Eight being a darker doctor, more willing to fight the good fight (Museum Peace, the end of the Lucie Miller run, Dark Eyes).
I adored having Night of the Doctor just for the sake of seeing him onscreen, and it was fantastically done. But from his character in the audios, I think Eight would have been willing to do more in the war effort before regenerating…he wouldn’t have needed a potion to make him a warrior, if he decided it needed to be done. And then, my doctor wouldn’t weasel his way out of taking responsibility later on just by changing his name like that. It was a cheap & easy way out, and dare I say a bit simplistic in the way it approached impossibly difficult ethical decisions. I did however really appreciate the gravity in the moment before they retconned it, when the three of them were all going to push the big red button together.
All of this being said, I’m really happy that the result of all this is the (probable) return of Gallifrey, so with the timelords back in action we can maybe have something more like the wandering traveling renegade doctor of the classic series than the grand and majestic Last of the Timelords whose adventures seem to affect the fate of the universe and the whole of time and space, every other week.
Should have said, “my OPINION that the 8th would have been the perfect war doctor”, rather than “the fact that.” I’m perfectly accepting of disagreement in this regard, but personally I am terribly sad that 8 won’t ever play that role now, as he does in my head canon.
No reason he couldn’t come back and play the role either alongside a Doctor or in flashbacks or his own show. I think he would have done the role if it had been offered.
I did originally believe it wasn’t was due to Moffat wanting a special 50th Anniversary Doctor we’d not seen before, but as time and data transpires, I suspect that came off the back of the failure to get Eccleston. Though some have cynically suggested the role as written for Eccleston was simplified and less involved with a less tasty deal on the table in the hope of him walking and a new actor being cast instead. In Baker’s words, ‘who knows/nose’. Probably never will!
It’s a blurry period. Odd Eccleston was offered and McGann wasn’t (after Eccleston said no), so do the cynics have some credibility in suggesting the part was only ever really considered for a fresh Doctor and the talks with Eccleston were just ‘going through the motions’? I don’t know, it is a curious affair given you have two Doctors who fit in the Time War period, one was asked, and then a new one was cast. Not that I don’t think Hurt was very enjoyable – he was!
“I did originally believe it WAS due to Moffat…” – these comments need an edit function… or a less slack commenter!
I think they have an edit function. I have an edit function, anyway.
Incidentally, I believe Moffat’s wrong because there have actually been instances when the Doctor refers to himself by his regeneration number. For example, Sylvester McCoy comments that things don’t bode well for ‘my Seventh Persona’ in Time and the Rani, whilst the First Doctor comments on there being ‘Five of me now’ in Five Doctors. Numbering is important in Trial of a Timelord, except we never actually saw the Valyard appear at the close of Time of the Doctor did we, though the name was referred to in Name of the Doctor. Anyone out there got any more references by the Doctor to his lives numbering?
In my opinion, Moffat created his own mess by meddling with something that didn’t need meddling with. IMO, there was simply no need to create the War Doctor when “Day of the Doctor” could have worked beautifully with the 8th Doctor. As has been said, there is ample Big Finish canon that points him being a darker Doctor. I have no idea if Paul McGann was ever approached about being in “Day of the Doctor” but I can’t help but feel that he would have been more than ecstatic to do it. Just think how fantastic it would have been at the end of “Name of the Doctor” had McGann stepped out of the shadows instead of John Hurt. (Nothing against Hurt. He played the part very well.) And it’s not like the events of “Night of the Doctor” couldn’t have been written into “Day of the Doctor.” With what effects they used, the 8th Doctor could have regenerated into the 9th (Eccleston) at the end of the story. I also can’t help but feel that the War Doctor only came about after Eccleston didn’t want to do it. Some of Hurt’s lines sounded a bit 9th Doctor-ish to me so I truly think the War Doctor was a panic-driven creation. And to back-peddle to count the Human-Time Lord meta crisis as a full regeneration with what dialog the writer did was just horrible. I don’t think the 10th Doctor was ever that vain.
IMO, Moffat spent an extraordinary amount of screen time and dialog establishing Matt Smith as the 11th Doctor. I think events as recent as “Nightmare in Silver” speak evidence that the idea of wrapping up the Doctor’s regenerations had not been thought of ahead of the “of the Doctor” trilogy.
One of you gents made a remark to the effect that any other fan running the show would like to do what Moffat did, in regards to wrapping up the the regenerations. I’m not sure that as a fan that I’d want to make such an indelible mark on a show that’s meant for more than just me. To me, that’s hubris in the extreme. I have no real issue with the idea of fans writing for the show or even running it. I’d love to write for the show, just an episode or even a book. I think whoever is in charge needs to consider what’s good for the show, not just what s/he likes. I could never bring myself do something so potentially hurtfully changing as the risk Moffat took with the events of the “of the Doctor trilogy.”
Honestly, as much as I didn’t like the end of the 80s for Doctor Who, I think I like it more than what Moffat’s done in the last year. I look forward to the next showrunner. I’d love to see a return to the traditional producer and script editor format that worked so well before.
Lastly, and I’ll step off of my soap box once and for all on this, if we as fans and casual viewers are to believe and accept that Matt Smith’s Doctor was the last (13th) of his previous life cycle, Peter Capaldi CANNOT be referenced as the Twelfth Doctor. He may be the 12th actor to play the part in this canon, but by the rule of 12 regenerations (meaning 13 lives), Capaldi is either the 14th Doctor or the new 1st. Get it the f@ck right.
Just checked out the Space 1999/Doctor Who mash up, brilliant, its like my childhood in the Seventies going into over drive. Now we just need a Doctor Who/Jason King mash up and we would be complete.
Fantastic isn’t it? I love the sheer nerdy scale of the new series ones, with some very good “This Episode” montages, but the Pertwee one really captures the Seventies vibe, even down to the closing Pertwee grin shot.
Wasn’t the entire Pertwee era a DW/Jason King mash up?
Wouldn’t Capaldi be the new 2nd (not 1st) Doctor or 14th Doctor in total? Logically Matt Smith was the first of the new regeneration cycle and last of the previous one too. A new cycle doesn’t gift a new unregenerated first doctor, and we get twelve more Doctors instead of thirteen…
“Logically”? Matt Smith would be the thirteenth Doctor, the final of the standard 12 regenerations lifecycle. The War Doctor and the Tenth Doctor’s second body (Journey’s End through to The End of Time) push the count along.
Therefore Capaldi is – as everyone other than you is aware 😉 – the 1st Doctor of a second cycle (presumably of another 12 regenerations? Who knows?) or the 14th incarnation. You can guarantee that all BBC PR and spinoff material, books, guides, DWM etc will be calling him the 12th Doctor. Steven Moffat can’t exactly stop that happening – you can’t fight an idea 😉
(Twelve regenerations = 13 incarnations)
I can’t cope with all these different possible numbers for the later Doctors – so I’ve decided that I will refer to them by their numbers up to 8 and then by actor name from then on. Simples! Life’s too short to worry about it.
Yes, but we used up a regeneration to get to Capaldi. A new set of regenerations does not equal a new 1st doctor. Capaldi-Doctor wasn’t born but regenerated, hence we’re already one down. That seems fairly airtight, but in the television show he’ll no doubt be the first of 13 and you’ll be right.
Does seem odd to be talking about logic in this context. Mr Moff is re-setting the rules. And, for once, I have no problem with it. We do not know how many incarnations of the Doctor remain now. A new regeneration cycle is not necessarily a new cycle of 13. Hopefully we fans can ignore the “how many lives does the Doctor have left” debate. It’s especially tactless to be discussing it before Doctor Capaldi makes his debut!
I, quite frankly, don’t give two hoots about the whole numbering debate, because it makes no difference at all to my enjoyment of the show. For convenience and marketing, he’ll be called the Twelfth Doctor. As the current incarnation, he’ simply The Doctor. My life is quite complicated enough without a television show, however beloved, getting my head muddled!
Besides, all this debate is just playing into Mr Moffat’s hands: I’m sure he stirs the pot like this on purpose to wind people up!