Recommend
9 
 Thumb up
 Hide
26 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Chit Chat

Subject: And we have the 13th Doctor! rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Joakim Björklund
Finland
flag msg tools
Overtext?! We don't need no stinking overtext! Oh wait...
badge
Overtext?! We don't need no stinking overtext! Oh wait...
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark O'Reilly
United Kingdom
Chester
Cheshire
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Great choice, great actress. thumbsup
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Hoffman
United States
Cortlandt Manor
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Pretty exciting. My four-year-old has been hounding us to start watching Doctor Who. Maybe 2018 will be the year she gets to!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Salamone
United States
Billerica
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Aggravating people worldwide since 1964
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I was hoping it would be Cindy Lou Who, who was no more than two.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Morris
United States
Raytown
Missouri
flag msg tools
2nd, 6th and 7th Wisconsin, 19th Indiana, 24th Michigan
badge
24th Michigan Monument Gettysburg Pa
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Spoiler (click to reveal)
Season one of Broadchurch has now become the Three Doctors.

David Tennant (Doc 10), Jodie Whitaker (Doc 13) and David Bradley (Doc 1). It even has a companion with Arthur Davill.


5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J J
Australia
flag msg tools
Interesting.

All morning a co-worker has been muttering and sputtering about something being ridiculous. She was reacting to the news bulletins on the radio she listens to.

Finally made sense of what she was on about when she at last came out with "you can't have a woman doctor who!".

Hadn't really given it any thought, but my first response was "and whyever not?". My second was "you know about Joanna Lumley and Missy, right?".

Interesting to analyse my own reaction to this. I really don't care either way (well, actually I wish they would insist on longer contracts for the actors - 5, maybe 8 years minimum), I find it rather interesting, and I have no issue with it (it makes sense within the show, especially given what they've already done), and certainly I don't see it as somehow ruining anything, but now that bull-headed and without-reason (and it was without reason; I asked for one and she could not give anything other than "its just stupid") response has got my back up...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Everts
United States
Foothill Ranch
California
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
"Nobody gets me. I'm the wind, baby!" - Tom Servo
badge
"Push the button, Frank!"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Not sure how I feel about this. I've watched Dr. Who since the Tom Baker era and this is quite a change. It does blow my mind a bit.

If they treat the character as the Doctor that just happens to be female, then it will probably work. But if they try to make her act superior to all men and team her with a weak male companion, then I'm not sure. Diversity is fine, but don't do it just to make a point, do it to make the character work within the story. This could be awesome, or it could be uncomfortable.

Guess we'll find out next year.
3 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J J
Australia
flag msg tools
ScottE wrote:
Not sure how I feel about this. I've watched Dr. Who since the Tom Baker era and this is quite a change. It does blow my mind a bit.

If they treat the character as the Doctor that just happens to be female, then it will probably work. But if they try to make her act superior to all men and team her with a weak male companion, then I'm not sure. Diversity is fine, but don't do it just to make a point, do it to make the character work within the story. This could be awesome, or it could be uncomfortable.


Diversity? How about quid pro quo? Swap the genders and you just described the formula for the first several decades.

No, I don't care for what you suggested either, but diversity's got nothing to do with it.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pieter
Netherlands
Maastricht
flag msg tools
Good intentions are no substitute for a good education.
badge
I take my fun very seriously.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Doctor Who may get ruined by bad stories -- see Peter Capaldi, who had the potential to be a great Doctor, but who never got the stories to shine. Doctor Who may be fantastic with good stories. Basically, gender does not matter.

In recent years we have seen many things ruined by making "diversity" THE big issue, thereby losing focus on story and acting capabilities. But Doctor Who has been quite good at integrating diversity issues without making a big mess of things -- that Bill was a lesbian may have been stressed a bit too much, but Bill was an excellent companion played by an excellent actress, and that is what matters. The fact that the last season was crap was purely caused by Moffat's lack of skill in turning cool scenes into a cool story.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Dearlove
United Kingdom
Chelmsford
Essex
flag msg tools
SoRCon 11 23-25 Feb 2018 Basildon UK http://www.sorcon.co.uk
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
JasonJ0 wrote:
ScottE wrote:
Not sure how I feel about this. I've watched Dr. Who since the Tom Baker era and this is quite a change. It does blow my mind a bit.

If they treat the character as the Doctor that just happens to be female, then it will probably work. But if they try to make her act superior to all men and team her with a weak male companion, then I'm not sure. Diversity is fine, but don't do it just to make a point, do it to make the character work within the story. This could be awesome, or it could be uncomfortable.


Diversity? How about quid pro quo? Swap the genders and you just described the formula for the first several decades.


Almost. Surprisingly often (especially for those looking at the whole of Pertwee and early Tom Baker) the doctor didn't just have a single female companion. He started with three. I'm not even sure what fraction of the time one female companion made up. Off the top of my head the point I can recall more than one companion but none male was after the death (hurrah) of Adric.

As for whether companions were weak, it depends. Often from story to story with different writers. There might have been a (not well enough picked up) message in the Sarah Jane Smith was (a) until the modern age, the fan favourite, and (b) probably the strongest in being allowed to independently produce parts of the solution (though not always).

Quote:
No, I don't care for what you suggested either, but diversity's got nothing to do with it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Leighton
England
Peterborough
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ScottE wrote:
Not sure how I feel about this. I've watched Dr. Who since the Tom Baker era and this is quite a change. It does blow my mind a bit.

If they treat the character as the Doctor that just happens to be female, then it will probably work. But if they try to make her act superior to all men


Because none of the other Doctors acted as if they were superior to all men. BTW people have been talking about female Doctors since at least 1983 (Nicholas Pegg tweeted an embarrassing letter he wrote to a newspaper when he was 14).

In a way we may have seen a number of changes this year which might well carry over into the new series. The resetting of the Doctor/companion relationship into a teacher/student relationship is obviously one that could work with female Doctor and a companion of any gender. Although I guess a lot depends on what characterisation Chibnall has settled on for the Doctor.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Leighton
England
Peterborough
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dearlove wrote:
JasonJ0 wrote:
Diversity? How about quid pro quo? Swap the genders and you just described the formula for the first several decades.


Almost. Surprisingly often (especially for those looking at the whole of Pertwee and early Tom Baker) the doctor didn't just have a single female companion. He started with three. I'm not even sure what fraction of the time one female companion made up.

I guess if you count the UNIT regulars as companions for Pertwee then a single female companion is by far the minority. There were very few single companion stories for the first three Doctors (and they were doing 45 episodes a year in the early days). The formula only really set in during Tom Baker's time (although all the first year and half the last had a male companion). Most of Davison's term was multiple companions too.

Quote:
Off the top of my head the point I can recall more than one companion but none male was after the death (hurrah) of Adric.

Turlough.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pieter
Netherlands
Maastricht
flag msg tools
Good intentions are no substitute for a good education.
badge
I take my fun very seriously.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Basically, the Doctor is sexless. Therefore the Doctor's gender does not matter. As long as they avoid any scenes of the Doctor being a male in a female body (I assume they won't take the "diversity" that far).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J J
Australia
flag msg tools
Flyboy Connor wrote:
Basically, the Doctor is sexless. Therefore the Doctor's gender does not matter. As long as they avoid any scenes of the Doctor being a male in a female body (I assume they won't take the "diversity" that far).


Huh. So where did Susan come from then?

And what did he get up to with River Song...?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J J
Australia
flag msg tools
Single female companion was not the part I was addressing. Deliberately inferior and weak female companion was, and they were all that for the most part (hell, Victoria is remembered pretty-much only for her screaming, and they even made it a plot point). True, some of them were on occasion permitted to be a little more boisterous, or even promoted as such, but even Sarah-Jane, Leela, Tegan, and Ace fell into twist-ankle-and-scream cliche.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Leighton
England
Peterborough
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
JasonJ0 wrote:
Flyboy Connor wrote:
Basically, the Doctor is sexless. Therefore the Doctor's gender does not matter. As long as they avoid any scenes of the Doctor being a male in a female body (I assume they won't take the "diversity" that far).


Huh. So where did Susan come from then?


The genetic looms like all the other Time Lords. Seriously, this was part of the Cartmel masterplan, although it didn't see any airtime, it did feature in the novelisation of one of the stories.

Although off the wall it kind of makes a bit of sense. The Time Lords would have had multiple millennia of advanced reproductive technology. Carrying children to term would be considered awfully primitive. Better to hand all that off to artificial wombs, and even have the fertilisation occur under controlled circumstances. If you think about it, with lifespans reaching thousands of years reproduction has to be controlled anyway for overpopulation reasons. Maybe when they graduate their genetic material is taken and then they are sterilised.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pieter
Netherlands
Maastricht
flag msg tools
Good intentions are no substitute for a good education.
badge
I take my fun very seriously.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
JasonJ0 wrote:
Flyboy Connor wrote:
Basically, the Doctor is sexless. Therefore the Doctor's gender does not matter. As long as they avoid any scenes of the Doctor being a male in a female body (I assume they won't take the "diversity" that far).


Huh. So where did Susan come from then?

Susan was the progeny of Time Lords. The Doctor is sexless with regards to humans.

JasonJ0 wrote:
And what did he get up to with River Song...?

I don't know. Despite River's annoyingly overt flirting, the exact relationship between the Doctor and River was never made clear. However, River was special in some sense as she was a child of the Tardis and had the capability to regenerate. Who knows what makes the Doctor sexually interested? We can be sure that humans do not interest him in that way, though.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J J
Australia
flag msg tools
You must be watching a very different show to me then (and also ignoring explicit statements from the producers).

I'll leave off here with one thing - Journey's End.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Patching
United Kingdom
Newport, Wales
flag msg tools
badge
If you notice this notice you wil notice that this notice was not worth noticing
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The thing with Doctor Who, unlike pretty much any other TV show, is that every single episode is set in a different time, different place, with different characters, different sets, different everything. The only real constants that enable you to feel as though you were following the same show are the Tardis, the recurring monsters and, most importantly, the Doctor.

Every person who's played the Doctor so far has played the character very differently but I've still been able to buy into the fact that it's the same character. If the new actor can do the same thing then brilliant. I think it's going to be tougher for her, but I'm willing to give her a go.

If you'd asked me a few years ago on my opinion of having a female Doctor I would have told you it was a lame idea that smacked of desperation and of pleasing the PC crowd.

But I would have said the same thing about a female Master and Missy was brilliant, probably the best 'Master' since Roger Delgado (and waaaaay better than her predecessor).
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Wilson
United Kingdom
Bristol
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Flyboy Connor wrote:
We can be sure that humans do not interest him in that way, though.


Except for Rose, Grace, River, Queen Elizabeth, Madame Du Pompadour...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Harkleroad
United States
Butler, PA
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If fans can put up with 3+ years of shitty, shitty showrunning and writing, they can put up with a female doctor.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J J
Australia
flag msg tools
Coase wrote:
If fans can put up with 3+ years of shitty, shitty showrunning and writing, they can put up with a female doctor.


Fans largely seem to greatly disagree with your assessment.

And why would a female Doctor be something to "put up with"?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven McKinney
United States
Kingsville
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Didn't I see Mr. Bean's Time Lord turn into a woman?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Wilson
United Kingdom
Bristol
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
steven1mac wrote:
Didn't I see Mr. Bean's Time Lord turn into a woman?


Even for a show that plays fast and loose with continuity, The Curse of Fatal Death is definitely non-canon.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Harkleroad
United States
Butler, PA
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
JasonJ0 wrote:


And why would a female Doctor be something to "put up with"?


Oh, come on. I'm framing this from the standpoint of a person criticizing the fact that the Doctor is a woman, which should be obvious from context.

Don't pull me in to your fake battle.

I love the choice of new Doctor, but I think the writing has been spotty at best lately and the showrunning poor. This is hardly a controversial opinion.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.