Thoughts on the new Doctor: Matt Smith??

Views: 236

Replies to This Discussion

I think that the old rule of 13 lives is probably out the window. There probably would have been some mention of it in the new series by now. By the way, doesn't that rule come from the 1996 tv movie? I think most people have selective amnesia when it comes to that. Can't blame them.

I couldn't disagree with you more about Lady de Souza. I think she's the worst character in one of the shittiest episodes of Doctor Who in awhile. The Water's of Mars though has redeemed this "season" though, and I'm wetting myself with excitement for the last two episodes.
I believe the 13 lives was from the movie (don't remember it being mentioned in any eps before that), so They could ignore it (which would make series 3s return of the Master make more sense). However, its pretty universally accepted among fans, and in the expanded universe, and the new series has been pretty good about keeping true to everything that came before.


I thought "waters on mars" was kinda flat on the whole. It was great seeing the doctor come into a fixed event knowing he couldn't help, and the episode did its job in showing why Tennant has to die, but as an episode, I didn't feel it was that great. It definitely was no "Blink" or "Satan Pit".
But that's just me, and the beauty of Dr. Who is that it appeals to everyone for different reasons.


As far as de Souza, I felt that, like all the new companions, she could have fleshed out over time and have her more grating qualities fall into the background(I mean look at Donna Noble), while there is a lot of story depth you could bring in with that.
On the one hand you'd have the frictious interplay between the Doctor and his first less somewhat tarnished companion. And on the other you'd have the character depth of the noble criminal.
Yeh it's pretty much written in stone, within the Doctor Who canon, that a Time Lord can only regenerate 12 times and thus has only 13 lives. I'm disappointed by how fleeting these recent regenerations have been.

But it has indeed been stated in The Five Doctors, ably sourced by William Muir; that Time Lords are in a position to grant a new regeneration cycle to individual Time Lords. Though on what grounds, who can say?

And as the resurrection of the Time Lords is at hand (role on New Years day), the writers might well be laying the grounds for some future - series extending - contingency.

Though personally it would have to be one HELL of a spectacular crisis to convince me that an amendment to the established rules, laws even, of the Dr. Who canon can be overwritten in such a way. - I just hope they don't screw it up my making up something trifling.
I also though Eccleston was ... fantastic (sorry) and Tennant was great. And somehow for some reason ... I have a good feeling about Smith.
I love Eccleston...miss the sardonic wit there. I am in love with the absolute hot geekness (and geekiness), the childish antics and sometimes rude behavior with Tennant. But I am looking forward to crying my eyes out over losing 10 and gaining Smith. I like his bowtie.
I have to agree again...I really did not like Souza either.

And I'm more than excited about the new season!!
I agree. I'm not worried about the age. I think he'll be great! And his companion looks awesome, too. She wears Chucks (like me)! I'm excited!
I'm getting a pair of Custom-made Chuck Taylors (red with DoctorWho down the back!)
I really don't like the format of the NEW Dr. Who series and that's had a knock-on effect when it comes to liking the individual actors who play the Doctor. They're always so young, perky and energetic; perhaps because they have to cram SO much plot into such a short time frame.

In the original series the doctor was always the old man of the lot, his companions were always MUCH younger than he was. He could be energetic, but it was fun because his was an energy you wouldn't - as a young viewer - associate with an older person.

These new doctors are young and energetic, and its like - so what? What's remarkable about that?! Young and energetic tend to go together anyway, there's nothing really new there.

In the original series the viewers (basically youngsters) identified with the companions. Russell T. Davis seems to have changed that focus to the Doctor himself; and I don't know whether I like it.

In the original series the Doctor was the Uncle, the Father or the Grandfather figure to look up to; but what is he now? Is he a brother, a cousin, a dad? Either way, it gets weird when you throw romance into the mix.

There's something disturbingly incestuous - or at least illicit - about a man who once occupied a 60+ year old body (William Hartnell) now being romantically entangled with his young companions who - for the greater part of the show's history - have looked up to him as either a parental or educational authority?

If he were a woman I might not have a problem with it and so I pitch the question to the ladies and gay lads of this discussion group: Is there something of the old high-school crush on the handsome new teacher at work, in the new Dr. Who series?
Is there something of the old high-school crush on the handsome new teacher at work, in the new Dr. Who series?


Although that was something I liked about Eccleston, he seemed to have a bit more of a hard edge. The first episode with Tennent his voice made me crazy, it was a bit squeaky. His passion grew on me, however and I'm hoping this kid will do something to make me love him too.
I would love to see an older version of the doctor----Bill Nye anyone!!!!? I love the Hartnell episodes.

I see myself more as The Doctor rather than the companion. Not that I'm really a Time Lord as my prof page suggests). But I want to BE the Doctor!!!! So it's not some crush for me. Though, he is really hot. Who doesn't love the geek? Mmmm, I do.
How about a female doctor? in our lifetime?




Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service