David Tennant Cast as New Doctor Who

Stephen Williams writes "Doctor Who fan site Output Gallifrey is reporting that David Tennant has been cast as the tenth incarnation of the Time Lord. Tennant, who has recently appeared in BBC dramas Blackpool and Casanova, has been linked with the role of the Doctor since the announcement of Christopher Eccleston's departure."

Comments

Re:great

[Hogwash McFly]

A female doctor?

Classically trained.

[MisanthropicProgram]

From imbd: Graduated from the Royal Scottish Academy of Music and Drama.

I always wondered if people like this get bored playing TV characters. Then again, over the span of a series, I guess you can develop a character and his emotions.
Or, he just wants to buy a house in the Caribbean.

Re:great

[Dogtanian]

what snext? The cross dressing doctor?

Tim Curry, dressed as he was in the Rocky Horror Picture Show (and I'd already posted that idea in response to a previous story).

Actually, he'd probably be a bit old for that now.

In all seriousness, I don't think Eddie Izzard would've been a good choice; too much baggage (not just handbaggage, arf), and I reckon he'd be playing "Eddie Izzard" all the time.

I thought Christopher Ecclestone was a good choice, because he *wasn't* an obvious choice. The obvious choice, to go with a 'famous', 'eccentric', 'British', blah blah Doctor, really struck me as a bad idea, based on people with half-baked recollections of Tom Baker and Jon Pertwee trying to come up with ideas. I've nothing against Richard E Grant, but he was too much along that line (yeah, I know he did an online story or something). Apparently they also asked Hugh Grant (no relation AFAIK) to do it at one stage, but he turned it down. THANK GOD! Hugh-'king-Grant, fer chrissakes!

I don't want well-known, and I don't want formulaicly eccentric. I want someone who can bring something new to the role without losing sight of who The Doctor is.

Ecclestone seemed to be that guy, and then he buggered off. Damn.

Re:Depressing

[Anonymous Coward]

Good point. One of the most sickening things about television these days is that with anything related to action/adventure, they seem insist on casting young actors, probably in hopes of creating a significant female following. "Casanova"? Give me a break! FormerSomething tells me this fellow will last as long as Eccleston did. Naturally, Doctor Who fans should be obsessed with the well-groomed careers of these actors. The better Doctors tended to be a little older, and so the show focused on plots and character than on mindless action and "adult drama in outer space". Computer-generated special effects? Wunnerful, but like these young things with great teeth and great hair, they get old pretty quick.

McGann's Doctor-by-committee was *wrong* idea

[Dogtanian]

Of all the modern incarnations of the Doctor, the best actor in the role was Paul McGann. He looked the part and is a very good actor. Now we get somebody who just doesn't fit the role.

Paul McGann was passable, but was really just a slightly bland generic amalgalm of previous Doctors (read the second half of this post) and someone's idea of what the Doctor "should" be like.

IMHO, to be successful and avoid comparisons with previous Doctors, an actor *has* to bring something new. The Batman comparison is flawed, because Batman was meant to be the same character in each, whereas each Doctor has a distinctly different personality- or at least they should.

Re:Stick Around!

[tuffy]

I'm hoping the same if only for the sake of some consistency. But once they've exceeded the established limit of regenerations, you can be sure they'll find a way to bypass it for the sake of bringing new leads into the role. The whole concept was invented to serve the show not vice versa.