Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Doctor Who Companion Announced

Posted by samzenpus on from the hanging-out-with-the-doctor dept.

eternaldoctorwho writes "Jenna-Louise Coleman will be the newest companion to the Doctor (Matt Smith) on the hit series Doctor Who. The announcement came earlier today on the BBC's Twitter page devoted to the program, along with some other details about the upcoming season of the show. Miss Coleman is also known for her previous roles on Emmerdale and Captain America: The First Avenger."

13 of 255 comments (clear)

  1. Male companion by Stargoat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why can't we have a long term positive male companion? Yes, it's nice to look at young women, but that isn't what Doctor Who is all about. Is it going to take a female doctor before we have can have a decent male companion that isn't a coward or dies every other episode?

    (If it does require a female companion, can I vote for Emma Thompson?)

    --
    Hoist Number One and Number Six.
    1. Re:Male companion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Why can't we have a long term positive male companion?

      Because the Doctor likes nice young girls to show them that it's bigger on the inside.

    2. Re:Male companion by LordLucless · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Back in the day, male companions were vastly outnumbered by female. And there's male companions in the new series too - Captain Jack, Rory, and Donna's Dad for that Christmas special (if you count that). But it's not like Doctor Who is alone there. Pretty much every show with a lead character has a supporting character of the opposite gender.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    3. Re:Male companion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm not claiming this is in any way representative of Who viewers as a whole, but my university has a Who fan club (we call ourselves the Society of Gallifreyan Scholars) and the membership is ~75% female.

    4. Re:Male companion by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm not claiming this is in any way representative of Who viewers as a whole, but my university has a Who fan club (we call ourselves the Society of Gallifreyan Scholars) and the membership is ~75% female.

      I am interested in your society and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    5. Re:Male companion by JosKarith · · Score: 5, Informative

      Matt Smith went to UEA, Norwich. A friend of mine shared an accomodation block with him - seems that he had a bad habit of shouting "Who loves the c*ck" when entertaining a young lady in his room... Unfortunately that knowledge has made it hard to take the 11th Doctor seriously despite my being a life-long fan of the show...

      --
      'Don't worry' said the trees when they saw the axe coming, 'The handle is one of us.'
  2. Too Bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Too Bad David Tennant doesn't want to act the Doctor anymore, Matt isn't bad, & does eventually grow on you but David is and in my opinion the best Doctor of the newer series.

    1. Re:Too Bad by apharmdq · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Tennant ran around and yelled a bit too much for my taste. Eccleston felt far more like the classic Doctors, in that he was more of thinker than a man of action. I definitely preferred Eccleston to Tennant. (Though Tennant does look dashing, and has some great moments.) I haven't gotten to Matt Smith yet, but from what a few friends of mine have told me, his Doctor is a lot closer to the classic Doctors, which is something I really liked. (FYI, my favorite Doctor is still the 7th, though I thought each one brought something unique to the table.) In any case, I have a feeling Tennant would have gone over a little better if it weren't for Russel T. Davies' writing style. But I guess I shouldn't complain, as RTD did bring the show back from the dead after all.

    2. Re:Too Bad by geminidomino · · Score: 5, Interesting

      . Eccleston felt far more like the classic Doctors, in that he was more of thinker than a man of action. I definitely preferred Eccleston to Tennant.

      And here I thought I was alone in the world. (My brothers still mock me for it)

  3. Re:Don't care until it is on Netflix by pseudofrog · · Score: 5, Funny

    I "agree".

  4. Re:I hate to say it... by FPhlyer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Series 5 and 6 of the new Who actually did something that Doctor Who has needed for a long time: it made time travel an important plot point in several of the stories. Time travel has obviously been an important part of Doctor Who, a story about a time traveler, since it began in '63, but usually time travel has been used as a plot device to get the Doctor into a dramatic situation. Steven Moffat has taken time travel and made the paradoxes an important part of the story itself.

    Unfortunately, Moffat has failed to resolve any of these dramatic time travel story lines in a way that makes any sense. He uses time travel as a device to get out of a sticky plot complication without worrying about if it makes any logical sense. The finale of Season 5 illustrates this: The future doctor goes back in time and gives Rory the sonic so that Rory can free the Doctor so the Doctor can go forward in time so that he can go back in time to give Rory the sonic... The only way that I can digest that poorly thought out resolution to the problem of getting the Doctor out of "the perfect prison" is to shake my head and let it slide because I like Doctor Who. But seriously... couldn't the writing staff of the series come up with a better resolution than that?

    --
    Brought to you by Frobozz Magic Penguin Fodder.
  5. Re:I hate to say it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's wibbly wobbly timey wimey stuff. I'd much rather have that than any of RTD's resolutions. Moffat may in fact be a time traveler himself, though. That, or he has seriously been thinking about this show his entire life. In the mid-90s, he was posting messages on Usenet about plot points he'd later actually bring to the show.

  6. Re:I dislike the whole premise of the show. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's better to treat Dr. Who as "science fantasy" rather than as "science fiction". That is, it might present some scientific concepts every once in a while, but if you're depending on the science to be realistic, forget it. You're a bit more likely to find philosophical commentary (as in "Genesis of the Daleks", where the Time Lords send the Doctor to genocide the Daleks, and he asks whether he has the right to do it, even KNOWING for a FACT how evil they are, and what horrible deeds they are known to have committed in the future).

    Star Trek makes more pretense to be science fiction, but it's always handwaving and doing bogus things, too. If you want hard science fiction, look for books by authors such as Larry Niven or David Brin.