BBC Apologizes To Who Star

An anonymous reader writes "SciFi Wire is reporting that 'The BBC, which earlier reported that Doctor Who star Christopher Eccleston was leaving the show after the first season, issued an unusual apology to the actor for mischaracterizing his reasons for departing...the network broke an agreement with Eccleston not to reveal that he had planned to film just one season of the hit show all along.'" We covered the announcement of his resignation late last month.

Comments

Is it just me

[elid]

or does anyone else find it odd that he only planned on being in one season...

Re:Is it just me

[Omnieiunium]

I've seen 2 / 3 of aired episodes, he seems pretty good. But yes, why would you only sign on for one reason? Seems strange to me.

Re:Is it just me

[Staplerh]

does anyone else find it odd that he only planned on being in one season...

An insightful post. One has to wonder what Eccleson thought, signing on to a series that one must have thought he must have hoped would have been successful? Either he was banking on Dr. Who tanking (doubtful) or simply wasn't thinking ahead.

Now this is just a wild-assed guess, but perhaps he's trying to make the leap off the small screen and Dr. Who was seen as a mechanism for him to make the transition. He certainly has recieved more media attention in light of this move - the initial reports of his departure from the show as well as the reports of the BBC apology?

Suppose that's just free publicity. He did get two appearances on Slashdot however.... and that can't mean nothing can it?!

Re:Is it just me

[OzRoy]

Not really. But I do find it odd that the BBC would hire someone who was only interested in doing one season. I would of thought the usual practice is to contract someone for many seasons to prevent this sort of thing happening.

Re:Is it just me

[Anonymous Coward]

could have just wanted to get his name out more as the who is a pretty well known show

Re:Is it just me

[Sebadude]

Not necessarily, it could be a very smart move. He's not stuck in some kind of multi-year deal, and look at the publicity he's getting.

Re:Is it just me

[Kesh]

He probably thought he would get his face splashed all across England, then be free for a high paying TV/film offering afterwards. It was advertising, pure and simple. Get himself known to the public and producers, then move on to (in his mind) bigger and better things.

Re:Is it just me

[Malc]

Especially considering that Dr. Who was only supposed to have nine lives (IIRC). Once he runs out, how will the Beeb explain the changes everytime?

Re:Is it just me

[Anonymous Coward]

This guy isn't exactly small potatoes, he had a great role on 28 Days Later, and a bunch of other films.

Re:Is it just me

[mollymoo]

Dr. Who is a Timelord (or is that Time Lord?), bending space and time is what he's about. Why not extend that to his face? At least in sci-fi you can invent some vaguley plausible (in the context...) excuse for using a new actor. In soaps they just stick someone else in and carry on regardless. Of all the series where you have to worry about replacing an actor Dr. Who ranks pretty low, even without the reincarnation mechanism.

Re:Is it just me

[EverDense]

Timelords are supposed to have 12 regenerations, so there is still a little leeway.

Re:Is it just me

[haydon4]

or does anyone else find it odd that he only planned on being in one season...


More importantly at this rate, isn't The Doctor going to run out of lives real fast?

Re:Is it just me

[Golias]

You recall incorrectly. Doctor Who gets 13 lives, and his main rival has already broken that rule.

Re:Is it just me

[Trejkaz]

It baffles me more that the eighth Doctor was reported to be keen to take the role back for the latest series, but the BBC instead decided to hire a guy who was ready to quit after only one season.

Re:Is it just me

[erick99]

Perhaps he was concerned that the Dr. Who character tends to typecast the actor more rapidly then in other series so he would do one season, harvest the fame, and move on to things that pay better? Just a thought (jeeze I have bad thoughts at times).

Re:Is it just me

[postsingularity]

That actually makes some sense as to the one season deal. It sounds like the BBC thought they needed someone like Eccleston to boost the show and figured a one year deal was a fair bargain for it.

Re:Is it just me

[rizzo5]

He's already been in a number of movies.

his imdb entry

Re:Is it just me

[Trejkaz]

The unfortunate thing though, is that they're now looking into a tenth doctor, instead of exploring the possibility of having a prior doctor come back for a season. And I thought McGann was great in the role, as little as he had of it (practically nothing, unless you count radio...)

Re:Is it just me

[spectecjr]

Apparently, the BBC managed to completely blow a huge surprise which was planned for this season of Doctor Who - which was that at the end of this season, the Doctor would die.

So Eccleston was only ever meant to be around for one season - and it was meant to be a huge shocker.

Re:Is it just me

[R.Caley]

but perhaps he's trying to make the leap off the small screen

Well, that makes lots of sense. An actor who most people probably associate with movie work doing a TV series to get out of TV.

Re:Is it just me

[Golias]

The could gain one regeneration back by simply pretending that the McGann doctor in the FOX special never happened.

After all, the Peter Curshing movies are not really part of the "canon" of the show either.

Plus, that means we can convieniently ignore all that "half-human" bullshit.

Re:Is it just me

[blowdart]

Ah but The Master stole his regenerations from other time lords. In episode 2 we're informed that something happened to all the other timelords and The Doctor is the last one left.

Re:Is it just me

[Golias]

"happened"... heh.

It's a time-travel show. You can get away with just about anything.

BTW: I haven't downloaded episode 2 yet. Thanks for the spoiler. :P

Re:Is it just me

[ivano]

it might be that the writer and EP didn't want to do doctor who without him, hence he could strike this sort of deal. in the end doctor who this time around is quite good, kinda like a kid's version of the x-files but with some nice extras. anyway it might be a nive trend to have a new doctor for each season

ciao

Re:Is it just me

[R.Caley]

McGann was terminally contaminated by association with the american TV movie. If he'd been the doctor in the new series I probably wouldn't have watched it.

Re:Is it just me

[Buran]

It's not like it matters that much... this show is well known (even to those non-watchers like me) for going through lead actors like a kid through M&Ms. They'll just switch actors again and write it off like they have every time previously with the magical plot-wand. (And, apparently, those who do watch the show don't seem to care -- not to offend any of them, just to note a fact).

Re:Is it just me

[TiggsPanther]

I don't find it too odd, although I realise I seem to be in quite the minority about that.

This new series seems to currently be focussing on introducing the basic concepts, as well as hinting at the backgrounds, for a whole new generation of viewers. The audience, through Rose, is learning all of the essentions - the Doctor not being human, him being alive for a long time, him travelling through time and space in a machine with a "disguise" that makes it rather too conspicuous.
In a way it would follow that the other of the essentials that has to be covered is the issue of regeneration.

It wouldn't surprise me if (as has been speculated) the Christmas special deals with the Doctor having to regenerate. In a way (and after a bit of though and seeing the second and third episodes) it would seem odd if after Rose having to ome face to face with all of the thigns that make the Doctor not-Human she didn't have to deal with him regenerating.

The only real drawbacks I can see are firstly that there has been a hard limit set on regenerations. And this brings it all the closer to having to find some way of dealing with that, and rpeferably in a way thar doesn't really alienate long-time fans.
Secondly the BBC really should have left the announcement until the end of this season. They've basically triggered the kind of speculation that should (and usually does) occur between seasons to happen during the season - which seems to me to draw the topic away from the actual show itself.

Re:Is it just me

[lilo_booter]

As someone who has watched Dr Who since he was a kid, I can say that 'magical plot wand' is greatly appreciated. If it hadn't been done, the series would have died before I even got a chance to watch it...

What I find surprising about the debate here is that noone has suggested that maybe, just maybe, in the last episode of the current series, the 'wand' has been used or the series ends with a real cliff hanger? Would have made a pretty surprising ending if it had, especially if the BBC hadn't reported this beforehand...

Re:Is it just me

[Lars T.]

He basically did the same with Cracker . An actor who enjoys playing different roles and avoids being typecast. He must be a complete moron.

Re:Is it just me

[rishistar]

I don't know how the rest of the season will pan out...but given this info I think what could work is if after the next Doctor has had a go there's a series of 'Time War' related material....that way there's a branding thing and the chance to go through some of what is a big event in the Dr Who universe.

Or have the Time Wars been covered previously as well?

Re:Is it just me

[Anonymous Coward]

He already is a big film star in the U.K. The BBC are probably grateful that they were able to attract someone of his calibre and stature to the role of Doctor Who.

Re:Is it just me

[R.Caley]

this show is well known for going through lead actors like a kid through M&Ms.

Er, the average is around 4 years. That's longer than most TV series last.

Re:Is it just me

[madprof]

He didn't *like* being Doctor Who.
That's why he's no longer in the show!

Re:Is it just me

[Anonymous Coward]

I would of thought the usual practice is to contract someone for many seasons to prevent this sort of thing happening.

I would have thought that as well.

Re:Is it just me

[Anonymous Coward]

Ecclestone has been quoted (yes, by the BBC!) as saying that he found the filming schedule to be rather stressful. Perhaps that is his reason for quitting after one season, he didn't enjoy it much as the pace was too frantic for him.

Re:Is it just me

[Anonymous Coward]

Did all of you forget that the doctor changes his appearance(because he is a timelord) so it would make sense that one actor cannot play the whole series? Just like the original?

-Ninjamech

Re:Is it just me

[Badfysh]

Actually Doctor Who does in fact get 12 regenerations but the first original life doesn't count, so you can have 13 incarnations.

Re:Is it just me

[clowe]

"Last one left"?? Just how do you apply linear temporal references to a species that supposedly lives beyond the boundaries of time?

Hmmm, now, where's my propellor-head beanie..

Re:Is it just me

[Buran]

Although a great deal of them should last longer -- seems to me that the network execs' rule is "If a TiVo with that one particular SID is recording that show, kill it!"

One television adaptation of a fantasy novel series I love got killed literally a day or two before the start of production -- because it wasn't Buffy-like and the producers refused to make it so. (It wouldn't have fit, not at all, but they bitched anyway).

Arrrrrg.

Re:Is it just me

[Buran]

Also, I note that most shows, whatever the length of their run, don't change character actors mid-series. Usually, if an actor quits, the character vanishes. (Like Claudia Christian in Babylon 5 -- Ivanova disappeared as a result of her quitting and only reappears in the final episode, which was filmed before she quit. Ivanova wouldn't have been the same without her!)

Re:Is it just me

[Golias]

That's what I said. 13 lives.

Re:Is it just me

[R.Caley]

most shows, whatever the length of their run, don't change character actors mid-series.

That's because they lack the mechanism to do so. So, we end up with Blake's 7 without Blake or Bablylon 5 desperately scrabbling to recreate the plot infrastructure built over a season around Sinclair for Sheradon.

The genius of the Dr Who solution is that rather than having someone else try to play the same character, they change the character, but retain the role. So, each doctor can be a separate character suted to the person playig him.

The other great serial role which works on the same basis (without explanation) is James Bond.

Re:Is it just me

[chris_mahan]

Yeah, but completely unknown in the big money game: Hollywood. Dr Who is a way to put his name across America, so he can get to the $20M/Flick tier.

Re:Is it just me

[Buran]

The trick is, "Was it planned?"

Much of B5's plot was written before the show ever started, so whether or not Sinclair was originally thinking he'd be on the show for multiple seasons, his role did change because it was designed to be changed before the show ever got started.

While the actor (I forget his name; Boxleitner plays his replacement) had to put a lot of time in in the first season (appearing in most episodes), he does appear again later (for spoiler's sake I won't say how, as it's a Vital Plot Point (tm)) in a couple of the later episodes.

Re:Is it just me

[R.Caley]

The trick is, "Was it planned?"

No. Watch the first season. Sinclair's girlfriend goes through the start of the story which is finished by Sheadon's wife. The transition was handled very well, but in the detail you can see that it was Sincalir who was slated to say `get the hell out of our galaxy' (and he'd have sounded much better doing it). Perhaps the biggest give-away is the way Sinclair just dissapears without us even seeing him being called off to his new job.

What I'd like to know is what was the original plot line for the Babylon 4 story arc was. Since we got the first part during season 1, there was clearly something planned which got dropped in favour of giving Sinclair his big destiny.

Re:Is it just me

[Anonymous Coward]

He's always been one of those "serious" actors who takes all his roles far too seriously and doesn't really like being in anything light or mainstream.

He guest starred in a League of Gentlemen episode to try and overcome his image of being too serious and no fun.

The same writer is involved in this new series. So I think he was doing the same thing here... trying to show he was up for a bit of fun and not completely miserable. Problem is... i think he probably IS fairly miserable and so it was only really a token gesture.

Series has been highly average so far anyway... more of a comedy than anything...

Re:Is it just me

[JailBate]

Hemm....i think that it was a good choice. I think that if I remembered correctly that he turned down the tv movie and then thought about going for the new tv series while jogging....as you do.

I think that he's looking to pay the rent for a while and then go back to the stage where he likes acting. but you know....it could just be that he dosen't want to be typed-cast as a timelord for the rest of his life and only show up on the "where are they now" kinda shows.

Re:Is it just me

[TomV]

It wasn't so much that the BBC blew the surprise, more that someone else (thought to be David Tennant's agent) let slip to the Sun newspaper that the BBC were negotiating with Tennant to take over the role, and when the Sun asked the BBC Press Office, they didn't know the true story, took words from Eccleston's interviews where he had described the hard work involved, didn't want to tell a full-on lie and basically botched the answer.

Re:Is it just me

[fcw]

Get himself known to the public and producers, then move on to (in his mind) bigger and better things.

Defintely not.

While you apparently have no idea who Christopher Eccleston is, I can assure you that he is very well known to the British public and producers as a versatile, serious actor in film and TV. Part of the BBC's advertising campaign for the new series was that they'd managed to get someone with the reputation of Eccleston to play the part; his face and voice were all over the place for months in advance, precisely because of how well known he already is.

At least as important (and one of the reasons Eccleston signed on) is that the show's executive producer, and head writer, is now Russell Davies.

To put this in terms that Americans who don't know Eccleston's or Davies's work might understand; it's a bit like casting Sam Rockwell or John Cusack as the Doctor, with the show being exec-produced by Aaron Sorkin.

Re:Is it just me

[Anonymous Coward]

I would of thought

"would have thought".

Re:Is it just me

[Anonymous Coward]

> perhaps he's trying to make the leap off the small screen and Dr. Who was seen as a mechanism for him to make the transition.

Yeah, it worked great for Jon Pertwee, Tom Baker, et al.
I can't count the number of blockbusters they've been in.

Re:Is it just me

[mink]

Careful, all the bab5ers are now going to try to eat you alive as they explain how the fully realized detailed 5 year story arc was divinely birthed from JMS. There were no guest writers, no add-libbed lines and all the scripts were laser etched in steel plates before the filming of the first season.

Not to rabid Bab5 fans. I enjoy the show but you all need to relax a bit.

Good response

[Staplerh]

"The BBC regrets not speaking to Christopher before it responded to the press questions on Wednesday 30 March," the BBC's head of drama and commissioning, Jane Tranter, said in a statement. "The BBC further regrets that it falsely attributed a statement to Christopher and apologizes to him."

Good apology for the BBC. Now, I'd reckon that this is out of fear of a libel case being filed against the BBC. Eccleson should be rightly miffed that the BBC would slag his good name, which of course lead to great consternation and comment on Slashdot.

I guess he just pissed off the BBC management and they gave the green light on a report that just happened to jump the gun.

Re:Good response

[Anonymous Coward]

Out of curiosity, how did you decide that "libel" needed a gratuitous link and not "miffed", "consternation" or "green"?

Re:Good response

[afay]

While I'm not the original poster, most likely he highlighted that link because British and American libel law differ greatly. I'm going to generalize, but in Britain the burden rests on the defendant to prove that what he or she said is the truth. In America, the rules are much more favorable to the defendant. For example, if you can prove that the words were simply opinion than you can't be sued for libel.

I'm American and I tend to favor the American versions (plural because it varies state by state) of the libel laws. If you're interested about the British libel law and why it's bad, check out the McLibel trial brought by McDonalds.

Re:Good response

[metamatic]

Revealing something true which you agreed not to reveal, is not libel, not even in the UK.

Re:Good response

[TomV]

Revealing something true which you agreed not to reveal, is not libel, not even in the UK.
Ah, but the potential libel is not that CE is leaving at the end of the season. As you state, this cannot possibly be libellous, becasue it is entirely true.

The potential libel was in the statement that CE was leaving because he found the workload excessive and did not want to be typecast. The second point might or might not have the potential to harm his future work prospects, the first certainly could do so.

Who?

[nxtr]

Doctor Who!
Doctor who?
Doctor who!
Doctor Who?
Not the pronoun, but rather a doctor with the unlikely name of "Who"

Re:Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

Doctor who?

Re:Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

He's eager to get back to his career as first baseman.

Re:Who?

[nacturation]

Not the pronoun, but rather a doctor with the unlikely name of "Who"

Were it the former, we'd have a bunch of grammar nazis claiming that the title should read "BBC Apologizes To Whom Star". Not to mention the ensuing thread of replies pointing out how it still isn't correct.

Re:Who?

[Bullet-Dodger]

I should've never saved you from those seals!

Re:Who?

[Dwonis]

I believe it *is* the pronoun. The Doctor's name isn't "who"; he's simply The Doctor.

Re:Who?

[kfg]

No, Who's on second

KFG

Re:Who?

[coopex]

No, What's on second.
http://www.baseball-almanac.com/humor4.shtml

Re:Who?

[kfg]

I don't know.

Third Base!

KFG

Re:Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

(..) lads shout
Dr. Who! (HEY) Dr. Who
Dr. Who! (HEY) The TARDIS
Dr. Who! (HEY) Dr. Who
Dr. Who doc..Dr. Who
Dr. Who doc..Dr. Who
Exterminate!
Bosh Bosh Bosh, loads of money
Who-ha
ha ha ha Who ha
ha ha ha Who ha
ha ha ha Who ha
ha ha ha Who ha
ha ha

Re:Who?

[Le_Batleur]

All your base....aw, never mind.

Re:Who?

[mrterrysilver]

doctor who? is right. why does this show get so much posting on the slashdot homepage? who really cares about this show? probably not more than 5% of slashdot readers. stick it in sci-fi but not on the main page.

Re:Who?

[91degrees]

who really cares about this show?

The editors. It's always been a site where the editors post what they think is interesting rather than what the editors think the readers will find interesting.

Re:Who?

[LGEKoji]

The problem is that "BBC Apologizes To Whom Star" really isnt grammatical, and it would be a bitch to make it fit, since there's no real way using just those morphemes. :)

Re:Who?

[confused.brit]

Everyone who's replied so far does. Yes, even the AC's

Re:Who?

[lifespan]

Maybe Dr Who didn't get a big run in the USA. It ran every week day for most of my childhood in Australia in the 70s-80s. There were only two channels, so if you weren't watching the news, you were watching Dr Who. In the same time slot they also used to run The Goodies, The Kenny Everett Video Show and Monkey. Growing up in Australia or England you would certainly have been exposed to all four of these shows as a kid.

The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[brandonp]

The BBC seems to apologize a lot for their reporting, do a quick search and you will find many examples. Here is a few:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ifs/hi/newsid_4220 000/newsid_4222300/4222353.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ifs/hi/newsid_4270 000/newsid_4273300/4273385.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ifs/hi/newsid_4030 000/newsid_4032600/4032665.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_ra dio/1544897.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/1050290.s tm
http://www.vermontguardian.com/dailies/0904/0322.s html
http://cbsnews.cbs.com/stories/2003/03/21/iraq/mai n545215.shtml
http://www.iht.com/articles/2004/12/03/news/beeb.h tml
http://www.rediff.com/news/2004/jan/28bbc.htm

Some are serious, some are ridiculous. But in the end, apologies result from improper reporting, much different than a simple correction.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[ElyseMyers]

A ha ha ha. The best part is how half-hearted BBC "apologies" tend to be. great job, guys.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[Frankie70]

The BBC seems to apologize a lot for their reporting, do a quick search and you will find many examples Probably because, unlike the American press, they really do reporting i.e. they don't just print off Press Releases & Talking Points. If 95% of your reporting were based off Press Releases + Talking Points issued by different people, then there would very little reason why the press would need to apologize.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, we will try better from now on, really.

-- BBC

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[quacking duck]

Far, far better to apologize when you're wrong, than to ignore (and if that doesn't work, deny) that there was ever an issue.

Too often these days big media are guilty of going the ignore/deny route. That the BBC at least attempts to rectify incidents of bad reporting puts them heads and shoulders above most others, because let's face it, no media outlet is always correct, especially where biases may affect the reporting.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't believe they apologised over failing to submit an interview with Mordechair Vanunu for censorship. I thought the BBC of all news organisations might have at least some backbone.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[nacturation]

Now imagine if the Slashdot editors would apologize for all their mistakes... would there be any room left for actual news?

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[mollymoo]

Naughty BBC for apologising when they get something wrong, what a shocking example to set for the children.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, the BBC should be more like our President: if you never apologize, you're never wrong.

Stupid shit.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[johansalk]

Fox News makes "improper reporting" hour after hour, day after day, and they never apologize.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[Zeussy]

Yes, but then they a huge ammount of articles a day. Regional, National and International. I would even dare to say 1000s of articles a day. So your bound to get mistakes.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[joe user jr]

They're obviously just in the habit of making things up. Look at the other "apology" here:

The BBC also released a quote from Christopher, claiming he had said he hoped viewers "continued to enjoy the series," but it's now admitted it did not consult him about that statement.

So: they "released a quote" without "consulting" the author of the "quote"?

I think what they're trying to say is: "Also, we made up a statement from Christopher that he didn't actually say, but it sounded nice, so we published it."

The practiced way in which they dress up their lying ("released a quote"? There was no @#!$ing "quote"!) shows how endemic this is. Probably a habit acquired from their political reporting where they can often diverge from the facts with impunity.

Fact: George Orwell based much of 1984 on his experience working in BBC news.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[mpe]

Probably because, unlike the American press, they really do reporting i.e. they don't just print off Press Releases & Talking Points.

Or even print fiction... It certainly dosn't help if the media concerned is more interested in producing entertainment.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[dylan_-]

This isn't BBC News apologising, it's the BBC channel. If a complaint is upheld against any of the UK broadcast channels they are obliged to apologise. I don't know why this was described as "unusual" because it's actually quite common.

As far as the quotes go, it seems you don't know how journalists work (in the UK anyway, I don't know if it's worldwide).

Step 1: Write your story with likely sounding quotes

Step 2: Secure your quotes
Journalist: "So, would you say you don't want to be typecast as The Doctor?"
Christopher: "Yeah, I suppose so"

Step 3: Print
"I don't want to be typecast as The Doctor," said Christopher.

Someone screwed up and forgot to do Step 2.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[Anonymous Coward]

Well yeah, they even had to apologize for requesting an interview with Bob Marley earlier this month :)

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[metamatic]

Any serious media outlet will have an independent ombudsman who responds to complaints about inaccuracy and inappropriate reporting behavior, and either a TV slot or a column in which corrections and apologies are reported by the ombudsman.

The fact that many Americans don't seem to understand this is one reason why the US news media are such a pathetic joke.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[Sheepdot]

No offense, but in the US, we get monetary payouts when our media outlets screw us over.

Look up "Richard Jewell" for a good example of this.

The BBS "apologizes" and everyone feels happy. If I were this guy, I'd be foaming at the mouth wanting a judgement against them. But in the UK, I bet suing the BBC is next to impossible to do.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[mollymoo]

Suing the BBC is just as easy as suing aybody else. They aren't part of the government, nor do they have any special dispensations in this area. They have plenty of lawyers of course, but what large organisation doesn't? Oryx won a libel action against them a few years ago after a BBC report suggested they were associated with terrorism.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[TomV]

The trouble with suing the BBC isn't anything to do with state funding. The trouble is, 'Auntie Beeb' still holds such a huge place in the public's affections that the damage to someone's popularity from being seen to sue the BBC, except in the most exceptionally clear-cut cases, would be far greater than any damage the BBC might have done to one in the first place.

Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot

[Anonymous Coward]

That was an April Fool's joke made in bad taste that no one wanted to own up to.

For those who do not know who Dr. Who is

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a wikipedia article on Dr. Who:
Doctor Who - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Re:For those who do not know who Dr. Who is

[Anonymous Coward]

your forgot to add "and care who know"

Re:...sigh

[Anonymous Coward]

You hope to get +5 for saying (on Slashdot!) that a story about Dr. Who isn't news? Good luck to you sir.

The doctor is a cylon

[loggia]

Very subtle joke for the attentive.

Re:The doctor is a cylon

[Short Circuit]

Very subtle joke for the attentive.

Or those of us who read Slashdot too much. (Yet haven't seen Dr. Who or BG.)

Re:The doctor is a cylon

[Anonymous Coward]

So does this mean Rose has cancer?

Re:The doctor is a cylon

[JoshRosenbaum]

Hey, I was a a part of that conversation on BG. ;) You can certainly tell who reads too much slashdot. :)

Re:The doctor is a cylon

[Le_Batleur]

For those of us who have missed that thread, would you please elaborate?

Re:The doctor is a cylon

[david.given]

Very subtle joke for the attentive.

I got it!

God, I have no life.

Re:The doctor is a cylon

[Short Circuit]

Look at this thread about the doctor in Battlestar Galactica in this article about Battlestar Galacita in HD.

Re:The doctor is a cylon

[Le_Batleur]

Ah - thank you. Interesting read, and interesting line of thought.

Re:The doctor is a cylon

[Eccles]

God, I have no life.

Trust me, they're overrated.

Re:...sigh

[Anonymous Coward]

You hope to get +5 for saying (on Slashdot!) that a story about Dr.

Who isn't news? Good luck to you sir.

What Doctor were you referring to?

Who isn't news? What type of question is that?

Getting smaller.

[richy486]

Stories only going for one hour, Doctors leaving after only one season, what's next? The tardis only having 50 rooms?

Re:Getting smaller.

[Anonymous Coward]

what's next? The tardis only having 50 rooms?

Well they can just create a second regeneration of it, the re-tardis.

*ducks*

Time is, after all, always in flux

[Leontes]

I just re-watched Rose (oh thank you bittorrent for given me the chance to watch these even though being out of the uk), and realized that the doctor could very well have recognized Rose from previous interaction with her. So if Eccleston guest stars and Piper is still on the program, it wouldn't necessarily violate continuity. I personally have very little problem with Eccleston's decision. I think that he's done so far a marvelous job in re-igniting the Who franchise. I think his reading of the doctor is marvelous and hope they find someone else who interpret the character so excellently. What about the doctor being his own companion for several episodes, if Eccleston returns for a guest spot? That would be interesting. I always thought "the * doctors episodes" were among the most compelling as a child.

Re:Time is, after all, always in flux

[Megane]

and realized that the doctor could very well have recognized Rose from previous interaction with her.

You didn't notice how Eccelston's Doctor was clearly behaving as if he was just recovering from a regeneration? Not that a previous Doctor couldn't have met with Rose, but when you thread your way through time and space, anything like that can happen.

Re:Time is, after all, always in flux

[Leontes]

The only thing that I noticed was his gazing at himself in a mirror and checking out his floppy ears. Hell, it could be years since his regeneration, since god knows mirrors aren't that common in alternative times/universes. (keeps reflections of television cameras out of frame, you see.)

Re:Time is, after all, always in flux

[Gax]

"What about the doctor being his own companion for several episodes, if Eccleston returns for a guest spot?"

I'd go crazy if I had to talk to myself all day.

I've been caught up in the Doctor Who craze and decided to check out a few old episodes. In The Three Doctors, it is established the doctor cannot normally cross his own time stream (i.e. bump into himself), although the Time Lords can get around this restriction. The 70s techno-babble isn't clear how this would work in practice. Is the Doctor prohibited from visiting 1999 after his initial visit or will he create an alternative timeline where the other doctor does not exist?

Re:Time is, after all, always in flux

[Megane]

god knows mirrors aren't that common in alternative times/universes

And you expect me to believe that there isn't a single mirror in all the rooms in the Tardis?

Re:Time is, after all, always in flux

[mink]

Or a pool of standing water anywhere in time/space.

IMO

[munrom]

They should apologise to the fans for wasting a regeneration

Re:IMO

[Metostopholes]

Especially since they already wasted one just by counting Paul McGann from the the crummy Fox TV movie as the eighth Doctor.

blame the Beeb

[weighn]

contract someone for many seasons
Or at least several seasons.

Dear BBC,
I'd like to apply for a job, but I must tell you that I'm quitting once my annual leave is credited (12 weeks after commencement).
Cheers

Re:blame the Beeb

[Golias]

Odds are, the conversation went:

Dear Chris,

Please, please, please star in our new show. We think you are the right man for the job, and we are really committed to making this new show work.

Cheers

Dear BBC,

Okay, but only for one season. I would like to spend the rest of my career taking on new roles in film and on television, rather than being the guest of honor at Sci-Fi conventions for the rest of my life.

Yours, etc.

Re:blame the Beeb

[EpsCylonB]

Apparently he asked to be in the show, which makes the whole thing stranger.

Re:blame the Beeb

[Dabido]

Which lead to the BBC lining up his new replacement. Dougal from the Magic Roundabout.

Who decided to make Who a chick flick?

[glrotate]

Calling home to mom on the mobile. Holding hands. "I'm so happy I met you" , "Me too", giggling, opressed servant girl saves the day.

I almost feel gay for watching it.

Re:Who decided to make Who a chick flick?

[Anonymous Coward]

you are gay.. and that was WAY before you watched it

now get back over here so i can continue fucking your ass.

Re:OT - Code mainainer - antibiotics from brushing

[Anonymous Coward]

It was the maintainer of Slackware. He mysteriously became "fine" again shortly thereafter. Hypchondriac, basically.

Air it in the United States already!

[shadowlight1]

When will a station finally pick the show up in the United States??? It's showing in Australia, the UK, Canada, and Italy to record ratings. Someone needs to wake up the execs that be and get this show on the air before we look like complete morons.

Re:Air it in the United States already!

[Omnieiunium]

-cough- bittorrent -cough- Here in Canada, they are only on episode 2, yet you can just go and download episodes 1, 2, 3 off some torrent site.

Re:Air it in the United States already!

[Jonny_eh]

I guess the BBC charges too much for the sci-fi network? But then again, it would be cheaper to pay the BBC than make their own crappy programming (Battlestar Galactica excluded).

Re:Air it in the United States already!

[op12]

Someone needs to wake up the execs that be and get this show on the air before we look like complete morons.

With the current state of US TV programming (with few exceptions) it is too late for that.

Re:Air it in the United States already!

[Anonymous Coward]

When will a station finally pick the show up in the United States??

Ask your local friendly neighborhood cable operator to carry CBC. Mine does, a few do even those states that do not border Canada. I watch it on CBUT out of Vancouver. You'll be glad you did when the Olympics come around.

Re:Air it in the United States already!

[Goth Biker Babe]

Sci-Fi had help with Battlestar Galactica. Sky TV paid most of it which is why we got it first.

Re:Air it in the United States already!

[mpe]

When will a station finally pick the show up in the United States???

The TV execs are probably looking for a way in which they can "remake" it for a US audience.

It's showing in Australia, the UK, Canada, and Italy to record ratings. Someone needs to wake up the execs that be and get this show on the air before we look like complete morons.

You'd probably need to borrow The Doctor's TARDIS to do that.

Re:Air it in the United States already!

[c0ldfusi0n]

You mean that those normally airs on TV?!

Man, i never knew.

Re:Air it in the United States already!

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh cool... so Candians (sans BitTorrent) haven't seen episode 3 yet? It's the best one so far. I thought the first episode was ok (bit childish), episode 2 was good with a few poorly scripted bits... episode 3 was a corker though. Excellent opening and a good solid story.

Re:Air it in the United States already!

[Anonymous Coward]

Before? :-)

Re:Air it in the United States already!

[shadowlight1]

Correction -- eek I feel just like the BBC -- it's aired in the UK and Canada to record ratings, and is signed to be aired in Australia and Italy -- perhaps because of the record ratings? :)

Re:Air it in the United States already!

[hal2814]

That's the biggest fear I have as a USian. I was pretty unimpressed with the US version of Coupling and the US version of The Office has its moments but they are too few and far between. I'm just picturing NBC making a Doctor Who series. They'd probably make the Police Box into a phone booth and cast two high schoolers in place of the Doctor. They would be from San Dimas, CA instead of Gallifrey. Mabe they'd hire George Carlin on as a minor character...

Why not re-sign?

[Rii]

Now that the series is popular, why doesn't he go ahead and sign for the next season? I'm sure he could get a bigger paycheck this time. Poor sci-fi gets no respect from actors and actresses... sheesh.

Re:Why not re-sign?

[Guidlib]

Sounds to me like he already did resign. :P

Re:Why not re-sign?

[Anonymous Coward]

if the bbc works on the same system belgian public tv works. that would make him an employe of the state, they make an OK living but nothing that can compare to money tv starts make on comercial chanles

demanding higher pay isnt that easy either

This isn't terribly surprising.

[A Sea and Cake]

Networks can be incredibly forgiving of actors if they really want them - the one-season limit of Christopher Eccleston seems to fall under that rule. Hell, The producers of Witchblade kept Yancy Butler when filming Witchblade, even though she had a substance abuse problem. They went so far as bringing her mom on set to keep her sober and filming shots where she wobbled after throwing a punch again.

Whereas if a crew member showed up once just a bit inebriated, they'd probably have been sacked. Cogs in the wheel, I suppose.

What are they going to do for next season, though? Ignore the elephant on the sofa, and change characters? Do an episode where Dr. Who wakes up in a different body due to some bizarre transformation gun he gets hit with? Deal with it Ed Wood style and have him killed off-screen?

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

Fortunately it is easy enough to change actors - regeneration. They have been doing it since the 1960s. And the previous actor isn't necessary for the regeneration to occur - just put the current actor in a wig (although that might be a bit difficult in this case). The only problem will be when they have the twelfth regeneration and reach the limit - although exceeding that limit has already been done by the arch nemisis.

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[Dachannien]

The only problem will be when they have the twelfth regeneration and reach the limit

Well, it wouldn't be the first sci-fi series to shoot the canon all to hell, so to speak.

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[NanoGator]

"Well, it wouldn't be the first sci-fi series to shoot the canon all to hell, so to speak."

Are we still on this? Am I the only one that caught the numerous episodes that explained that time was being messed with and First Contact that polluted the time line in the first place?

"You've insulted my thorough command of 21 seasons of Star Trek Trivia!! Bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch..."

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

Do an episode where Dr. Who wakes up in a different body due to some bizarre transformation gun he gets hit with?

Not a big Dr. Who fan I see.

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[rodgerd]

They don't need to violate continuity if they really want to give him more than 12 lives. The Master, another Time Lord, has gone past that limit by stealing bodies from others. So there's an easy out by having others sacrifice themselves for the Doctor (or perhaps having another Time Lord volunteer regenerations).

Oh. Were you actually interested, or just another Trek weenie slagging off Enterprise?

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[mark-t]

Even more than that, the Timelords were once willing to offer the Master a proper chance to again regenerate with a "completely new life cycle" in exchange for his cooperation in "The Five Doctors". Now it seems that the Master wasn't entirely helpful so he didn't receive the reward promised, but the precedent is there at least, so they don't have to break continuity to give the Doctor additional regenerations. If the Doctor did something noteworthy enough for the Timelords, I have little doubt they would offer him twelve new regenerations, as they were prepared to do for the Master.

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

actually, the problem comes with the 11th regeneration.

remember, Colin Baker met the 13th Doctor already, and he's known to be evil, as most Time Lords seem to become near the end of their regenerations.

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[wormeyman]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr_Who A time lord can be regenerate his body up to 12 times. "It is also revealed that the Doctor has the ability to "regenerate" his body when he dies, something he can do twelve times. The production team created this concept to allow for re-casting of the part when an actor wanted to leave or otherwise needed to be replaced. Prior to the 2005 revival, the regeneration was always worked into the storyline. The new series begins with the Doctor already regenerated and it is unclear if we will see a regeneration scene in flashback or otherwise."

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[lisaparratt]

What, other than being not only the last of them left, but previously being their president in exile?

There's a fair chance of him having the equipment tucked up safely in his tardis!

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

And the previous actor isn't necessary for the regeneration to occur - just put the current actor in a wig (although that might be a bit difficult in this case).

Eccleston is still contracted to do the (unfilmed) Christmas special, so they could do the regeneration there, assuming they've sorted out the actor for the second series by that point.

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[Dachannien]

Hey, I'll trade you my Insightful for your Funny. ;)

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[Dachannien]

Were you actually interested, or just another Trek weenie slagging off Enterprise?

Well, I was gonna link to the new Battlestar Galactica series, but I figured it's easier to karma-whore when you're not ripping on a show that people actually like.

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[NanoGator]

Hehe. :)

Cheers.

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[kbahey]

Networks can be incredibly forgiving of actors if they really want them.

Whereas if a crew member showed up once just a bit inebriated, they'd probably have been sacked. Cogs in the wheel, I suppose.

Not much different than corporate America: if a CEO screws up, they get the golden parachute, whereas if a janitor or engineer did so, they would be sacked, and at best get severance of a few weeks.

Remind me again how much did Carly take home when she was fired from HP?

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[mink]

You know, the Master for all his evil and nastiness, got the shaft in "The Five Doctors".
The timelords drag him back to Gallifrey and threaten to kill him if he does not help them. Then no one of the Doctors or companions trusts him (understandable) but go as far as to attack him when he is trying to explain that he was sent to help. Because of The Doctor he gets captured by cybermen who plan to kill him as soon as they are done with him and he has to thread his way past all the many "Traps of Rassilon".

As much as he is a villain you cant help but feel sorry for him in that episode.

Re:This isn't terribly surprising.

[Vo0k]

Or just like for James Bond movies, use
plot.continuity.hole=sizeof( DRIVABLE_THROUGH(TRUCK) );

The Doctor What?

[Anonymous Coward]

"I am the Doctor."

"Oh great, 'cause I have this really nasty rash on my back ..."

"Not that kind of doctor. THE Doctor."

"The Doctor what?"

"That's near enough ..."

Re:The Doctor What?

[Angostura]

The 'Doctor What?' joke is actually done by Rose in the first episode of the new series. Very droll?

Re:The Doctor What?

[Anonymous Coward]

The writers pulled off a similar joke in Ep.2. The Doctor and Rose arrive on the space station and encounter the steward:

Steward: Who the hell are you?
Doctor: Oh, that's nice! Thanks!

Hilarious.

They should apologize for this...

[Anonymous Coward]

The Beeb tells us all about Saddam's nuclear weapons program.

not so strange

[SpiralSpirit]

If the show does well, they sign him for another season. If he gets sick of it or it tanks, he isnt tied to it. Sounds like smart carreer planning to me.

Shame..

[Turn-X Alphonse]

It's a shame he is leaving after one season. As I grew up I never had any intrest in Dr. Who, it always seemed to drag on and be boring when I watched it (so did episode 3 of the new series to a point though..). But the new Dr. Who intrests me, the humour is very... classic so to speak. Rather then the "heres a few black people or a daughter living with her player father" crap we see every week in and out, Dr. Who is infact funny when it's ment to be. You don't sit there going "hey go on make a joke!" but when you do get a joke it's most the time at least slightly amusing. I'll probably follow the full series through and see how much I like/dislike the new Dr. as to what I do next season, but right now Christopher is carrying the series.

Billie Piper is "okay" but her tone just ruins it for me, she sounds like she needs to be pregnant and have several kids just to get a free house and some extra (free) money from the government. Now theres no problem with sounding like that in modern stuff, but when you're traveling time and no one notices you've got a weird voice somethings up... ep 3 did... minorly cover this issue, but again very minorly..

Where it really stands out is how Christopher plays the Doctor. He bounces and bounds and generally seems to rather enjoy traveling time, saving the Earth and quite frankly having a bit of a giggle while he's at it. I've not seen him in anything else and don't really desire to, but as the doctor he's perfect.

Hopefully the BBC can get him to do a few more seasons. Everyone saying "he's using it as a stepping stone", the other way could be he's trying to revive Dr. who so it will open up sci fi again beyond "star gate and enterprise" on channel 4 every bloody weekend. While he may "waste" a regeneration he's still managed to win over thousands of fans new and old, maybe even some hated enemies of the show.

So like him or not, or his actions. He deserves all the respect he gets for being a magnificent actor in his current rule and reviving not only Dr. Who, but decent comedy which isn't a parody or steriotyped.

Re:Shame..

[Leontes]

Doctor who on television was dead, though. If it means having a really amazing doctor for one year vs keeping the television program off the air, I'd prefer the one year of interesting shows. I'm not so sure if I agree or even understand your criticism of Piper. Accent accuracy and response by others within the context temporally can either be explained by the translator field generated by the TARDIS or just adorable kitsch campy production value. The fact you find her accent to be low class and that of a stereotypical welfare abuser suggests to me they've done a great job in casting, since I feel, people whom have such thoughts should be exposed to stimuli that counters to such harmful, ridiculous stereotyping.

Re:Shame..

[Anonymous Coward]

People that worship gundam wing, fail to earn enough respect to criticise Dr Who.

Re:Shame..

[Anonymous Coward]

but as the doctor he's perfect.

No, Tom Baker was perfect as Doctor Who.

Re:Shame..

[mbourgon]

I find this part quite insightful:
the other way could be he's trying to revive Dr. who so it will open up sci fi again
A-men. I have no idea how popular it is, but my suspicion is that they got a very good, non-genre actor to fill the part, to get people excited about it, and then (as someone posted in the prior thread about The Doctor) regenerate him to someone else, both showing off the ability, as well getting higher ratings.

Doctor Who fanboy comments follow:
All that being said, I'm really curious how they're going to deal with regeneration #12 (especially since 12 merges with 4 to help regenerate into 5). Then again, it took us 10 years to go from 8 to 9, so maybe I shouldn't worry so much.

Re:Shame..

[Leontes]

Yeah, he could always be granted another dozen or two by some sort of entity or something as a reward. Didn't the master make it past twelve? Suffice it to say. I'm confident there are enough creative writers out there to successfully retcon a solution.

Re:Shame..

[Capt'n Hector]

"(Billie Piper) sounds like she needs to be pregnant and have several kids"

I, for one, would be most willing to help her with that.

Re:Shame..

[Turn-X Alphonse]

Well neither do you considering you can't tell the difference between a Gundam refrence to a totally and utterly different series. So I suggest you stick it.

Re:Shame..

[R.Caley]

she sounds like she needs to be pregnant and have several kids just to get a free house and some extra (free) money from the government.

Indeed, you'd think she was playing a shop assistant with limited education who lives on a council estate... oh, wait, er, ...

Re:Shame..

[Turn-X Alphonse]

I'm working class myself. I grew up in the country side so I admit I'm a bit "out of it" compared to London and what I would consider the "UK slums" (AKA council estates and places like that). But I'm tired of her cutting off letters like "Happen" is now "'appen". It's really annoying to me personal. I like the idea of some girl going on a magical adventure with the doctor and they are doing it well, but I just wish she could use English in a better form. I'm not perfect with my English and don't claim to be, but I don't cut off whole letters in words repeatedly.

I understand where your comming from and I'm not saying all people with voices similar to hers are like that. But everything character wise (her mother.. says it all really, she's about as dirt cheap as you can get..) points to her being a no hoper working in a clothes shop all her life. Now I understand that the BBC is selling it to that crowd by doing it (Look, even some slag can travel the universe!). But I wish she would at least try not to use English a bit better.

I try not to judge people (fictional or not) on outer apperance or how they sound. But Rose's whole character is ment to be played off that way as far as I can tell. So I won't hold it against the writers or Billie to an extent but you'd think if the TARDIS can make you speak alien languages then it should be able to fix you missing h out of Happen no?

Re:Shame..

[Turn-X Alphonse]

Indeed. if you see my above post you will see my "problem" with that. It's not really a problem at all.. I'd just rather not think "fucking chav" every time she talks. Which TBH is all I do think. I replied to another guy above (mentioning the TARDIS fields) and posted about it there. It's 6am and I need to sleep so I'll just point you there rather than mess around.

Re:Shame..

[Turn-X Alphonse]

but how would you explain the merging?

Maybe he could split or it could be "another" 12. As in he reverts back to say an older one (off screen obviously, just use the voice some how) and then revives from there to a "new-new" one.

But then you have to remember that this is Dr. who and no time frame is permant. What happened in Time frame A may not come to pass in Time frame B. So if the doctor prevented say the darleks shootin his 11th regeneration by killign them off early he could in theory save his own regeneration..

Re:Shame..

[R.Caley]

I'd just rather not think "fucking chav" every time she talks

The stories of the doctor's side kicks are often, perhaps usually, redemptive. To run a redemptive story arc you have to start with someone who makes you want to beat them around the head with the clue stick.

Rose is being played as someone who has stupidly wasted her opportunities and is being given a chance to try again. She's clearly supposed to be brighter than her initial situation would imply. She's being played as one of the comanions who can hold their own against the Doctor (Liz, Sarah Jane, Leela, Romana) arther than a screaming unit.

As to her accent, her English is no more non-`standard' and low-value than Eccleston's. His is the real departure, all the previous doctors have had high-status accents. Combined with his clearly being deeply fucked up over what has happened in the recent past, he's definitely an interesting doctor.

Re:Shame..

[R.Caley]

No, Tom Baker was perfect as Doctor Who.

Traughton.

Hartnel was great for what he was doing, but it was Traughton who defined the Doctor as we have known him since. By definition tham makes him the perfect doctor.

Also he did it so well he turned an attempt to keep a dying show going into a multi-decade jugganaught which was only stopped by a really heroic decade long campagn of idiocy within the BBC.

Re:Shame..

[As Seen On TV]

Wow. Prejudiced much? I suppose you're from Oxfordshire and look down your nose at anybody from north of Luton?

Re:Shame..

[Anonymous Coward]

As an American who has watched Dr. Who from Pertwee on, I have absolutely no clue as to what class status UK accents signify.

I do, however, like Eccleston's accent, and dislike Piper's accent.

I fink th' fing tha' 'appened is tha' she loses letters, yeh? I guess if you ah an actuh, you ain't got to use em all! Meh opinion is tha' et ain't no big fing!

UUUUGH. She's pretty, she's smart, she's a great character on the show, but when she has extended dialogue it starts to grate on me. Nothing horrible, but the accent is definitely a negative, imo.

P.S. I love the internet... I've gotten all the new eps (and documentaries surrounding same) on the day of broadcast, practically at the equivalent broadcast time of 7PM. My compliments to your government for sponsoring such wonderful programming.

Re:Shame..

[mibus]

But I wish she would at least try not to use English a bit better.

Right! ;)

Re:Shame..

[munrom]

Billie Piper is "okay" but her tone just ruins it for me, she sounds like she needs to be pregnant and have several kids just to get a free house and some extra (free) money from the government.
Is that a job I can apply for :)

Re:Shame..

[Goth Biker Babe]

"Rose is being played as someone who has stupidly wasted her opportunities and is being given a chance to try again. She's clearly supposed to be brighter than her initial situation would imply. She's being played as one of the comanions who can hold their own against the Doctor (Liz, Sarah Jane, Leela, Romana) arther than a screaming unit."

Absolutely. I was going to post something similar but you saved me the trouble. I'm originally from darn sarf and although my accent isn't quite as lazy as Rose's it's still esturian and so I stick out now as I live in Yorkshire. Rose has a similar problem. The Dr's Manucunian accent brings hers in to sharper relief. It's only an accent you'll here on East Enders or The Bill every time.

Re:Shame..

[R.Caley]

I have absolutely no clue as to what class status UK accents signify.

Hm. Translation.

Imagine Rose is speaking white trailer-trash, the Doctor some variety of black English.

Her accent nails her to a social and educational background (she wasn't going anywhere without losing that dialect), his is one which would have traditionally have had been associated with strong, mostly negative, steriotypes, but more recently has become sonewhat cool, especially with younger people.

Here's a theory. Given the translation effects of the tardis, perhaps we hear the doctor as his companions see him/need to see him. Hartnel is the slightly old fashoned schoolmaster two 60s teachers expected, Pertwee had to be the kind of expert who the brigadeer would listen to etc.

Rose, of course, meets a figure she has to instantly respect and listen to -- ``I'm the Doctor, run for your life!'' -- that can't be the kind of authority figure she has clearly rejected from school etc, nor the kind of people she lives amongst (consider that awful boyfriend), so she hears a slightly exotic, slightly cool dialect which is not `them', but distant enough from `us' to carry some weight.

Re:Shame..

[Kanon]

The point they're trying to make with Rose isn't that she's a baby dropping, welfare scrounger it's the fact that she's a nice intelligent girl who made some bad choices early in life and is regretting them. She's stuck in a dead end job with no prospects and a wet drip of a boyfriend. Then she meets a man who shows her that there's a universe out there. Full of wonder and sights to behold.

This series is as much Rose's journey as it is the Doctor's.

Re:Shame..

[Anonymous Coward]

she is not even working class which is more annoying i met her at a gala dinner at riverside college. when she was much younger and i was on the school debate team at the time visiting -- im not entirely sure why she was there really i doubt it she attended college there.

i would have hit on her but she was too, well 'unwieldy'
[huge hands she could be a great mobile telephone hand model!]

its not that great a college but it was a venue for this dinner function.long time ago

point being she always moved in the right circles - i doubt she was invited for being a singer or famous it was on the cusp of her first realease [i did not know who she was at all.] and never did she once drop her 'aitches'

so it is probably her 'interpreation' of the character! as a real 'act-AWW"
oh dear.

good god everyone has probably realised i am the only poster on slashdot over 13!

Re:Shame..

[vidarh]

I find the criticism of Billie Piper's English quite amazing... Personally I react extremely strongly to dialects I don't like. I find many English dialects extremely painful to listen to, but I haven't even noticed hers. Perhaps it's the fact that I live in London, and it's more common than not for me to hear young people talk like that on a daily basis - including in the upmarket parts. As for language understanding when travelling time, it's a moot point as someone else has pointed out, as the second episode made a big point of how the Tardis would translate for them.

Re:Shame..

[Anonymous Coward]

I find your snobbery offensive.

I'm from a working class british background and i think you really need to look past how people speak / dress to what they are really like.

so what if shes got an estuary accent? millions of people share that - do you label them all as "welfare scum"? what has her mums clothing got to do with what shes like as a person? get over it!

if you have problems facing up to your own background thats your issue, but please try to keep your misanthropist bile in check if you want people to take you seriously.

Re:Shame..

[Turn-X Alphonse]

You have an intresting point and I really didn't see the doctors accent as at all weird. He seemed normalish to me (except he could beat Dumbo in a big ears contest but then we all know that and it's a common joke). I get what the series is trying to do with Rose. But there is rather an annoying edge to her which just won't ever go. Billie Piper sounds like that and always will sound like that, so even if she developes to be the best character in the series we still have to have her sound like she's some no hoper. Can you really see her going "oh doctor the matric is misaligned, we need to re-adjust the quazimetamorphasis dialo and then reinstall the melifenium drive"? I'd love to see her try but it's never going to happen..

Re:Shame..

[Turn-X Alphonse]

I think you'll find I'm in the midlands and don't look down on people much at all.

Re:Shame..

[Turn-X Alphonse]

Hold her own as in try and get victorians to be sluts? :P

I get what you mean and I know she'll develope and become much stronger (infact she's already started) and more intresting. But she's always going to be Billie Piper and talk like that which is where my "issue" comes in. You can watch ANY reality TV crap these days and find it infested with non-famous Billie Pipers. Did we really need to send one to far off alien worlds and in time too?

Re:Shame..

[R.Caley]

Hold her own as in try and get victorians to be sluts? :P

Hold her own as in trying to tell the doctor he was being manipulated into doing something really, really stupid. Of course, he didn't listen, the one constant character trait across all the doctors is that he's an arogant SOB.

Re:Shame..

[Turn-X Alphonse]

You're on slashdot.. he probably hangs here too.. that AC guy probably..

I see your point but holding your own and being a bit of a gobby cow is different IMO. Right now I think he just brushs her off much like a pet per say (Oh she's a stupid human, WTF lets get her lost in time!). But as she learns more and stops holding his hand he'll listen a bit more... but who knows, it looks like someone has to save the doctor from a dalek so.. :D

Re:Shame..

[R.Caley]

But as she learns more and stops holding his hand he'll listen a bit more...

I hope not. That would be messing with the mythos more than giving Daleks legs. (insert image of Leela rolling her eyes and sighing as the doctor strides off to do something stupid).

Re:Shame..

[Turn-X Alphonse]

The mythos seems to have gone out the window a tad.. within 2 episodes we already saw the doctor as "human" and that his world was screwed over.. not so mysterious now is he? :P

Re:Shame..

[R.Caley]

within 2 episodes we already saw the doctor as "human"

In what way? If you mean he fucked up, he always has done, the structure of the show is that the doctor gets everyone into trouble by being arrogant and thinking he can make the world right, and the companions get everyone in trouble by being out of their depth (Romana, being a timelord and a companion did both).

The doctor only ever had one real moment of self doubt, and it's for that reason one of the most famous moments in the whole series (when he can't decide whether to destroy the Daleks).

Destroying Gallifray is just a minor tweak. He was getting too chummy with them anyway, there was always the question of when the time lords were going to step in and fix everything. You'll note he is going around trying to fix the resulting mess in the first episode, and I'll bet the big season finish is him deciding he's just the guy to retroactively win the war.

Re:Shame..

[mink]

Years and years of "Are You Being Served?" re-runs on PBS here in the states has gotten me used to her kind of accent, as well as a few others. I understand it's "lower class and slang filled" but a lot of people who are "lower class" are smart, just because they have accents from where they are raised/live. try spending a few years traveling all over North America and try judging people by the idiosyncrasies of speech.
What would you rather have as the Doctors companion, Hyacinth Bucket?

Uh What?

[Jason Hood]

of the hit show


Lets not get carried away here...

Re:Uh What?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, it has been on the air two or three times longer than other "hit" shows...

Re:Uh What?

[drekmonger]

Yes, the hit show.

The hit show that recently beat out the Royal Wedding in UK ratings (8.3 million viewers vs. 6.2 million):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/news/drwh.../10/18419. sh tml

Re:Uh What?

[Tim Browse]

Well, people do like to see their heroes battling the passage of time, the juxtaposition of the modern with the historic and traditional, and setting right great wrongs that have occurred in the past, along with...oh come on, you can finish this joke yourselves...

Re:Uh What?

[t_allardyce]

Yeah thats because absolutely no-one gave a crap about the wedding. I think people are still in the watching Dr Who to see if it gets better phase - i can take the bad acting and in-your-face effects now, but im still waiting for some better story lines - maybe some darleks, maybe some billie piper getting piped.

Re:Uh What?

[PigleT]

Well, quite. Sure I watched the first episode of the new series, the other week. Since then, I saw a handful of news articles touting it as a `great success' based on audience/viewer figures - all based on *JUST ONE SHOW*. So the past couple of weeks, I've missed it entirely, partly because I want to expose their "statistics", and partly because I'm not such a Dr Who fan anyway... Funny, I've not heard anything about repeat-viewing stats since..

Re:Uh What?

[Anonymous Coward]

So the past couple of weeks, I've missed it entirely, partly because I want to expose their "statistics"

You idiot. Do you even have one of the sets that monitor TV viewing figures?

Re:Uh What?

[Bill_Mische]

The Dalek - 30th April

The episode guide is here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/episodes/ind ex.shtm l

Re:Uh What?

[webwalker]

first ep was 10m, second weas 7.3 (great weather that weekend, remember?) and ep 3 came in at 8.3m which was higher than the wedding of his royal frogness and the rotweiller princess.

By contrast, Farscape, even at it's tops in the USA was doing only 3m.

Most show developers would sell their soul for those kind of ratings, so yea, it's a hit.

Off topic but...

[wing03]

Anyone catch "Quiet Undead" and heard that thing about a time war?

I'm probably just way too tired with only 4 hours of sleep this weekend, but regardless that this is a series about a time traveller, I'm seeing visions of Captain Archer, Daniels, that ship that was bigger on the inside than it is on the outside, future guy and Trek's temporal cold war rearing its ugly head into this.

Re:Off topic but...

[Leontes]

Actually, I have a theory that they are hinting to a huge temporal war that ended up in the death of the timelords except for the Doctor (and perhaps what the celestine conciousness was blaming the doctor for when he gets made at him in the premier). It's a pity that Enterprise has kind of poisoned that concept, but it seems pretty different, considered the tragic outcome has already occurred. I hope I'm right. A subtle interlocking arch tying together the seasons of Who is exactly what is needed to keep this on the air for another 26 years.

Re:Off topic but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Some postulations and potential spoilers.....

About the temporal war, something very much like it has already happened in the 8th Doctor novels. Granted, I haven't seen Unquiet Dead for myself and can only guess, but if Davies is actually answering the age-old DW fandom question of "Will the TV series accept the continuity of the novels?", he might be opening a bigger can of worms that he suspects.

But questions of canon aside, if the Time Lords really are gone, leaving no "ultimate authority" over Time, then timestreams can be messed with at will. Eccleston could be retconned out or made the First Doctor, maybe even both - making Rose (the character AND the episode) a temporal paradox. Yeesh, makes the brain hurt.....

Re:Off topic but...

[SamSim]

There's a novel, referred to at the bottom of this article in which the Doctor "retroactively wiped the Time Lords from history". Whether this is being used as canon to build the current series I couldn't say, but it fits.

Re:Off topic but...

[wing03]

But questions of canon aside, if the Time Lords really are gone, leaving no "ultimate authority" over Time, then timestreams can be messed with at will. Eccleston could be retconned out or made the First Doctor, maybe even both - making Rose (the character AND the episode) a temporal paradox. Yeesh, makes the brain hurt....

What roles do the Gaurdians of Time have then?

Re:Off topic but...

[mink]

To stay there and make sure he doesn't leave.

Australia?

[Chuck Chunder]

It's showing in Australia, the UK, Canada, and Italy to record ratings

Is it?
I think the ABC have bought it but it isn't being shown for at least another month...

Re:Australia?

[Anonymous Coward]

You suck at life.

Re:Australia?

[bigsteve@dstc]

... but it isn't being shown for at least another month...

A lot longer than that I'd say. The ABC are currently doing a rerun of old "Dr Who" episodes starting from the beginning. They are currently doing Tom Baker episodes and just finished season #15. By my reckoning there are 11 seasons still to replay before we get to the new ones.

My Tardis is broken, so I can't check what episodes the ABC have shown for the next few months.

Re:Australia?

[aussie_a]

It's being downloaded at record rates you silly ninny.

Re:Australia?

[matlhDam]

As the press release linked to in the grandparent notes, the ABC isn't waiting for the repeats to finish before showing the new series (nor should they, given the number of repeat episodes still to show). New episodes start in May.

Re:...sigh

[Anonymous Coward]

You hope to get +5 for saying (on Slashdot!) that I hope to get +5 for saying (on Slashdot!) that a story about Dr. Who isn't news? Good luck to you mam.

BTW, I am the grandparent poster.

Re:...sigh

[NanoGator]

"Does anyone care about this? This is not news."

A major news site apologizing for being wrong doesn't surprise you?

Facts vs. Opinions

[brandonp]

The Press should take the available facts and report. So yes, if the news outlet reports from available facts, they will have a difficult time finding reason to apologize.

On the other hand, if you tend to take a stance and build your case with items that make your case, it will eventually cause you trouble.

This isn't something found in one particular media outlet, all media outlets have to be on guard and keep this from occuring. Just seems that some media outlets have had particular trouble with the problem in the recent past.

Brandon Petersen

Re:Facts vs. Opinions

[Frankie70]

This isn't something found in one particular media outlet, all media outlets have to be on guard and keep this from occuring. Just seems that some media outlets have had particular trouble with the problem in the recent past.


There is also another issue especially in the USA.
Many times even if a news organization publishes a true report, corporations have ways & means of silencing them i.e. by expensive lawsuits, by pulling out Advertising etc. Hence sometimes press has to apologize. Because of this I think the press in the USA atleast has decided that investigative journalism is just not worth pursuing.

Check this link for the Food Lion & Monsanto
incidents.

Re:Facts vs. Opinions

[mollymoo]

The Press should take the available facts and report. So yes, if the news outlet reports from available facts, they will have a difficult time finding reason to apologize.

The only facts that conveniently materialise in front of a reporter are the ones put there by interested (ie biased) parties.

Doctor Who - More actors then Ophra Winfrey

[infonography]

For those of you outside the US, Ophra Winfrey is actually a role in a Situation Comedy pretending to be a Talk Show. (Like the Daily Show, only not as funny) Wacky stunts like giving cars away to the whole audience and stuff isn't real. This explains why 'Her' Weight seems to bounce up and down. It's a mask. Different Women and sometimes Men pay the part.

At this point your asking yourself why am I getting off target. The thing is the the actors playing Ophra have now numbered over 8 and that's threatening the number of people who have played the Doctor. The BBC is trying disparately to regain the title of most actors playing one role in an ongoing series.

They need to add three more doctors to keep up.

Re:Doctor Who - More actors then Ophra Winfrey

[sirius_green]

Very surreal and enjoyable response!

Re:Doctor Who - More actors then Ophra Winfrey

[PinkStainlessTail]

For those of you outside the US...

Actually the US daytime talk show evil has spread. Oprah, Springer ,Montel, Rikki: these have all aired in the UK (OZ, NZ and SA too, I think).

Re:OT - Code mainainer - antibiotics from brushing

[Anonymous Coward]

It was Patrick Volkerding.

Re:...sigh

[Anonymous Coward]

The sky is falling!

Really. Who the hell cares?

Re:BBC could take a lesson from Zonk

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not dave, dave.

Re:BBC could take a lesson from Zonk

[Anonymous Coward]

Er, well, either am I. I can tell you this much though, why would dave post a link to his posts if it wasn't him then? Humm?

Re:...sigh

[NanoGator]

"Really. Who the hell cares?"

Obviously you and a dude with a mod-point don't. Whoop-de-fuck.

re: ...before we look like complete morons

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you want to think that one through again ?

I mean, Paul McGann's abortive attempt at the Doctor just stank.

And not to mention the dumb idea of trying to give Daleks legs.

If you want good TV - keep it away from American TV exec's - they are the kiss of death for all good SciFi

If they were really intelligent...

[ashitaka]

They would make taking a turn as the Doctor into something all well-known actors would aspire to, just like the guest spot on the Muppet Show used to be.

This would set off raging discussions online about who the next Doctor will be, who the next Doctor should be, who the best Doctor was, etc.

Built-in buzz. C'mon BBC get with it.

Re:If they were really intelligent...

[mr.mighty]

I nominate Natalie Portman. Or Sandra Bullock. I'd watch Sandra Bullock reading the phone book.

Re:If they were really intelligent...

[Anonymous Coward]

The thing is, well-known actors wouldn't touch Dr. Who with a ten-foot pole. Even a nobody like Eccleson can't seem to distance himself from it fast enough.

It's an extremely niche show, basically just for geeks. It doesn't have anywhere near the cachet of, say, Star Trek, and even the Trek franchise has to scrape the bottom of the barrel for talent, with very few exceptions.

Don't get me wrong, I like your idea in principle, but it's a fantasy.

Re:If they were really intelligent...

[SamSim]

This would set off raging discussions online about who the next Doctor will be, who the next Doctor should be, who the best Doctor was, etc.

If I may ask, what gives you the impression that this isn't already very much the case? :)

Re:If they were really intelligent...

[cryptochrome]

who the best Doctor was

Oh come on. Everybody already knows it was the fourth Doctor, Tom Baker.

mod parent up

[Anonymous Coward]

haha.

How many lives do Timelords have?

[snuf23]

Gee - I though Dr. Who was all washed up after he turned into a woman and ran off with the Master in the Curse of the Fatal Death?

*Seriously, if you are, were or ever will be a Dr. Who fan you must see this!

Re:How many lives do Timelords have?

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought it was 13 lives. i'm not Into Dr Who at that info-level, just heard a discussion over this on the radio a short while back.

That's What you get.....

[oO Peeping Tom Oo]

For partaking in armed rebellion!

i give up..

[oedneil]

WHO is leaving the show?

Re:i give up..

[Beolach]

Yes.

Re:...sigh

[MedHead]

A major news site apologizing for being wrong doesn't surprise you?

I'm not surprised that the BBC got something wrong, nor am I shocked to see they apologized for their error. I've seen signs of bad reporting in the past, so making a mistake is not something new for the BBC. They're not as credible a source as some claim. As for apologizing; well, they're not the first to do it, and certainly won't be the last.

I know many people here live and breathe the BBC, but I hold little faith in their reporting skills.

Re:With my time machine...

[JoaoPinheiro]

... i claim first post :P Not quite.. =)

Re:for the love of god...

[rodgerd]

Having the Romanas wasn't enough for you?

What?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why can't you?

Re:This isn't terribly surprising. ** SPOILER **

[AndroidCat]

or perhaps having another Time Lord volunteer regenerations

What other time lords? Apparently they're now all dead or something. (Or at least that's what the Doctor says, or he's using Jedi-Think and just means it "in a manner of speaking".) Of course, they could have just futzed with his memory again.

Re:for the love of god...

[Anonymous Coward]

How you know he is male? from the 3 episode i saw
"he" is more like a THING then a person male or female.

Bring back Paul McGann

[borgheron]

He was good as the doctor in the 1996 movie. The story just sucked.

GJC

Re:Bring back Paul McGann

[Rob T Firefly]

Big Finish brought him back a while ago, there are a few years' worth of quality McGann stories out there and it's still ongoing. Each one of those have better stories than the movie, and McGann has really grown in the role.

Perhaps...

[Mazem]

BBC previously said that Eccleston left for fear of being typecast. Now they apologise and say he left because he only signed up for one season. But that's an opportunity to leave, not a reason. I think he did leave for fear of being typecast, and the BBC is just covering their ass.

Re:This isn't terribly surprising. ** SPOILER **

[asuffield]

Given the importance of the Time Lords to the defence of spacetime against all the morons who have managed to get their hands on time travel technology and other creative ways to bugger the universe over the years, their destruction can only be a collossal fuckup. Fixing it is probably the Doctor's job, either in this series or in a future one.

is it just me...

[VanillaCoke420]

...or shouldn't we solve our problems on this planet that is in the real world before we start producing sci-fi shows about other worlds?

Re:is it just me...

[smallguy78]

no, just you

Eddie Izzard for the next Doctor!

[Anonymous Coward]

You know it makes sense!

Re:Eddie Izzard for the next Doctor!

[Anonymous Coward]

Totally with you on this."Ooooh Daleks eh,sink plungers?...ooooh, I know, run upstairs".

Insightful?

[Anonymous Coward]

The BBC is trying disparately to regain the title of most actors playing one role in an ongoing series.

Why would they care?

Doctor... Who?

[Greyfox]

The only time anyone EVER said "Doctor Who" on the show, it was a question, after he and his assistant had bolted and the people they'd helped were doing the end-of-show everyone-lives-happily-ever-after scene, IIRC. I don't recally much else than the guy going, "Doctor... Doctor who?"

And yes, I HAVE seen that episode. And YES, I have gotten laid in the historical past. Astounding...

Re:...sigh

[elgatozorbas]

A major news site apologizing for being wrong doesn't surprise you?

As someone else pointed out before, this isn't the first time for the BBC. And I agree with the GP. It is newsworthy to know there is a new series, maybe even that the actor will only participate for one season. But are these apologies relevant news? They guy IS still leaving afaik.

Nigs are taking over your anus

[TacoWTF]

Refer to this thread to take a look inside your future. You'd wish that you could put down niggers by insulting their grammar skills, after you're crammed up by several negro penes

David Tennant

[David Off]

Don't worry too much if Chris doesn't come back next year. David Tennant will make an excellent Dr. if the Beeb can convince him to sign-up.

David Tennant is currently starring in the BBC's Casanova and although not to everyone's tastes I thought this mini-series was excellent. I can't see him wanting to do the Dr for a long time though.

Tennant previously had a role in the BBC Webcast: Doctor Who: Scream of the Shalka. Richard E. Grant played the Dr.

Re:David Tennant

[Lovemoose]

Tennant was also superb in the live version of quatermass, on BBC4 last week. It was two hours of live sfi-fi on tv, brilliantly acted, and superb all round. The fact that it was actually being performed live made it all the more impressive. Tennant would make an excellent replacement for Eccleston - he gets my vote.

Re:David Tennant

[TomV]

There's a reasonable chance Tennant will stick around. He's on record saying that he's a massive Who fan and has been since childhood, that Who was a major motivator in his becoming an actor, that he's wanted the part since he was five years old (all this well before the new Series was announced in 2003). He's also taken part in several of Big Finish Productions' Doctor Who audio stories, as well as their Dalek Empire series, for money that's massively below what he could earn elsewhere, which is another positive sign.

The thing everyone seems to miss...

[Bill_Mische]

...is that the new series of Dr Who is a return to proper Saturday night family entertainment. You know when the whole family sit and watch something together. (My six year old sits on my lap and peeks over my arm at the scary bits - makes me all nostalgic).

Oh and actually on the main story - Christopher Ecclestone is well known in the UK, and *he* asked the head writer for the part. That he didn't run to two series is a pity but since it took 8 months and the second series wasn't actually confirmed until after the first episode went out understandable. He is committed to a Christmas special so that's when to expect the next regeneration.

Anyway, it's back, they'll have trouble getting rid of it a second time and the new Chairman of the Governors has been strangely quiet;-)

Re:The thing everyone seems to miss...

[Anonymous Coward]

A regeneration story would kind of be a bad thing to air over Christmas. Regeneration stories tend to be a little less lighthearted that normal Doctor Who fare.

Re:I think the main dowsideis...

[Angostura]

Presumably they'll just explain that the 12 incarnations business is traditionally counted in the Gallifreyan (sp?) numbering system - base 46 or some-such.

"Did I say twelve?"

Italy?

[mbaciarello]

Never seen it in Italy. If it has been bought, there's no news whatsoever about it. Maybe pay channels on sat? Not a chance in the world it's having "record ratings" in Italy, though.

By the way, I wonder how they would adapt/translate it. The original "who" is rather unpronounceable in Italian... Too awkward to be the most spoken name in a series. One more reason to download shows in their original language, if you ask me...

Re:Italy?

[Drooling Iguana]

Actually, the main character is never referred to as "Doctor Who" in the series. He's just The Doctor.

To be honest...

[Kjella]

...I prefer any break from the same US accents in 90%+ of the decent sci-fi shows out there. Billie is something like Cinderella in sci-fi, the simple dead-end job girl who ends up travelling time and space with an alien. I think the accent is perfect. And she's not bad looking either. Now bring her to some era where skimpy clothing is in .

Kjella

Available to all via BitTorrent (URL included)

[Jagasian]

The new Dr Who series has been available via high-quality TV rips on the best BitTorrent TV site, BTefnet.

Regeneration

[pjc50]

This is the Ninth Doctor; the way it's always been handled in the past is that the Doctor regenerates into a new body at intervals.

No Problem Too Daunting for a Good Writer...

[Thedalek]

The only problem will be when they have the twelfth regeneration and reach the limit - although exceeding that limit has already been done by the arch nemisis.

Look, I don't even pretend to have writing skills popular enough to merit working on a TV series, but this is science fiction: Nothing is out of bounds.

Even I can come up with a number of plot twists or elements which would allow for "extra" lives, so to speak:

The Doctor & Rose visit an ancient alien who seems kind enough, but turns out to be draining the life-force out of all manner of beings. After meeting the Doctor, the alien starts draining his life-force. After the menace is defeated cleverly, the Doctor gets his life-force back, but as a bonus, all the other life-forces which were previously stolen go to him.

-or-

The mysterious events of the Time War are revealed, and the Doctor may have been the cause of it all. But is he really the Doctor, or did he just go mad after accidentally destroying his race across the entire span of history? Enter the real "Doctor," and the Gallifreyans are saved.

-or-

Side effect of surviving the Time War.

-or-

Extra Lives for unexplained reason. Starts to make the Doctor question his own nature.

-or-

Half-Human hybrid has unexpected bonus.

Criminy, the list goes on and on. Doctor Who has repeatedly and chronically presented situations which seemed hopeless in the last half of an episode, then shown them to be completely harmless in the first 30 seconds of the next episode. "How will the Doctor escape the Dalek bearing down on him? Tune in next week... to find out that Daleks are blind as bleedin' bats. Or that it wasn't there. Or that it's a friendly Dalek, part of the Dalek Resistance. Or that the Doctor wasn't actually standing where we thought he was. Or..."

You get the idea. No problem is out of bounds for a good writer, and very few problems are out of bounds for a mediocre one, even.

Re:The Doctor's space ship

[Anonymous Coward]

TARDIS, fucktard.

At least get your trolls somewhat accurate.

Re:...sigh

[rjshields]

You hope to get a +5..? Etc, ad infinitum.

Can anyone say

[Anonymous Coward]

Contract Negotiations?

Re:I think the main dowsideis...

[derkyjadex]

base 46 or some-such.

Sureley 42?

It was intended all along

[Anonymous Coward]

It was intended from the beginning that Eccleston only be in one season - the intention was for him to regenerate at the end of the season. Eccleston was to brought in for one season and there would be a regeneration at the end *as a surprise*. Everyone signed non-disclosure contracts so they couldn't talk about it in January.

The Problem was The Sun (the most awful newspaper in the universe - think the NY post x10), which keeps trying to pretend that it's the shows great champion (and wrongly takes credit for bringing the Daleks back) got wind of Chris leaving and asked some BBC flunkie - who stupidly confirmed it and made up some stock reason (ie. typecasting).

What this means is, that thanks to The Sun, the end of series suprise has been soiled and Eccleston is now unjustly tarred with the Brush of "The Guy who quit Dr. Who because he didn't want to be typecast."

Don't belive me? Check out April 8 here

http://www.gallifreyone.com/newstv.php

Russell T Davies appeared today at the Celtic Film Festival, in fact interviewed by his co-executive producer Julie Gardner, in the Balmoral Suite of the Holland House Hotel... A tabloid journalist asked if Chris eccleton's leaving the show had been a disappointed and both Russell and Julie stated unequivocally that it was always planned that he would do just one season and that the end of episode thriteen was supposed to be an enormous surprise for the audience - a surprise now blown.

roffles

[Anonymous Coward]

You speak the troof, brutha. Someone dig up Pertwee and let's get old school, hard core. Knowhatimean?

Fuck that

[Anonymous Coward]

Eddie Izzard would be the worst possible Doctor. It would be Eddie Izzard as Eddie Izzard in the Eddie Izzard show.

Ophra Winfrey a fictional character?????

[Matarick]

Where is the evidence of your claim and why is it ranked insightful instead of funny?

If your post was a joke then I would of laughed more but posting this as 'insightful' is mind boggling.

Please help this confused USian out.

Re:Ophra Winfrey a fictional character?????

[infonography]

I can only guess that my assertion fits the needs of a good Theory as Sherlock Holmes would say; "It is an old maxim of mine that when you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

Re:This isn't terribly surprising. ** SPOILER **

[AndroidCat]

There was a war and they lost and everyone that the Doctor runs into these days seems to know about it. (The plastic pal, the tree lady, the ghastly ghosts. Three out three so far.) Eventually he's probably going to explain that the only way he could save Gallifry was at the cost of everyone else .. and then The Plot will force him to save them anyway somehow. Or something.

American version

[OldManAndTheC]

I'm just picturing NBC making a Doctor Who series.

It would some retooling, to wit:

1. The Doctor would have muscles.

2. The Doctor's companion would have breasts. Yes, the British version has breasts, but they are incidental to the character. The American version would feature the breasts as co-stars. They might even get their own spinoff series.

3. The platonic relationship between the Doctor and his companion would change to one of sexual innuendo, at which the Doctor would occasionally express vague feelings of shame and guilt.

4. The Tardis would have weapons, and the Doctor would carry a gun.

Re:...sigh

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone just got himself voted out of the geek community.... Where did i put my sonic screwdriver?

Re:...sigh

[rjshields]

Someone just got himself voted out of the geek community.... Where did i put my sonic screwdriver?

Hey, Jeff! We need some more rubber wallpaper over here!

Re:This isn't terribly surprising. ** SPOILER **

[mink]

He will explain later.