Moderators DavidB Posted January 3, 2009 Moderators Share Posted January 3, 2009 A lot of people elsewhere are complaining that they've never heard of him. I don't really see why that should reflect badly on him. We all know who Jade Goody is but it doesn't mean she would've been good in the role! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ann+sara+emma+dani Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Hopefully, he'll have an older companion, which would be nice. I'm excited about seeing him in the role. He seems quite gothic- maybe he'll be the first goth doctor. It would certainly be a different style. But he seems like he could be a really good doctor. The only thing I'm worried about is it becoming some kind of teeny bopping girl show, because it seems that he is the type of guy that those girls squee over. But I'm sure that won't happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyberem78 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 He looks about 18, not 26, and I think it'd alienate the older fans if he has a very young assistant too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyberdrunk Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 (edited) A lot of people elsewhere are complaining that they've never heard of him. I would like to tell these people that David Tennant was an household name prior to 2005, wasn't he? After seeing the extended interview on the offical site, I think Matt Smith will be great. A Tom Baker-esq Doctor if you like. Lets get back to making some proper Doctor Who! I'm just worried that all these 'Tennant lovers' won't give Matt a chance. Edited January 3, 2009 by cyberdrunk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christoff Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Hmm, I don't know what to think as I don't know him/his work. I must admit I wasn't impressed when it was announced, I thought he looked too young for the role and that he wouldn't work as the doctor, but after seeing clips from other things, he did look older in some of them and seemed to be able to act Suppose we'll just all have to wait and see how he is, but he just doesn't look... Doctorish (I know that's probably a ridiculous comment considering there's been 10 other doctors who look nothing alike but that's not the point ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yesindeed Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Hopefully, he'll have an older companion, which would be nice. I'm excited about seeing him in the role. He seems quite gothic- maybe he'll be the first goth doctor. It would certainly be a different style. But he seems like he could be a really good doctor. The only thing I'm worried about is it becoming some kind of teeny bopping girl show, because it seems that he is the type of guy that those girls squee over. But I'm sure that won't happen. agree 100% and this may be a first so hold on to your hats folks i agree with Hier David My top 5 choices where 1) Eddie Izzard, he'ld have been slatted but he would prove to be amazing 2) Bily Nigh, go old again 3) Julian Rhind-Tutt (google him) 4) Chiwetel Ejiofor 5) Sean Pertwee, like father like son But after seeing this guy in the interview i was blown away looks like Noel Fielding with the kid from (Damn whats that film all of you hyped up so much it ruined it).....oh twightlight, twitches like Johnny Depp (when he's pretending to be Keith Ritchards), sounds like Tennant, crazy eyes and a playful sense of humor considering its Moffat Writing most of the new series its great they went a bit dark to go with his stories can't wait to see the outfit, i'm thinking stylish but much older, victorian shirt, suit jacket and jeans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nosfer2 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 A lot of people elsewhere are complaining that they've never heard of him. I don't really see why that should reflect badly on him. We all know who Jade Goody is but it doesn't mean she would've been good in the role! I don't mind that I don't know him - after all, Tom Baker was an unknown when he took on the role and that went rather well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yesindeed Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 A lot of people elsewhere are complaining that they've never heard of him. I don't really see why that should reflect badly on him. We all know who Jade Goody is but it doesn't mean she would've been good in the role! I don't mind that I don't know him - after all, Tom Baker was an unknown when he took on the role and that went rather well! Baker had been around and done a good bit before the doc Davidson is a better example, he was an unknown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nosfer2 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 A lot of people elsewhere are complaining that they've never heard of him. I don't really see why that should reflect badly on him. We all know who Jade Goody is but it doesn't mean she would've been good in the role! I don't mind that I don't know him - after all, Tom Baker was an unknown when he took on the role and that went rather well! Baker had been around and done a good bit before the doc Davidson is a better example, he was an unknown You are entirely wrong - Peter Davison was incredibly well known at the time he was cast because he played Tristan in All Creatures Great And Small. Tom Baker was working on a building site when he got the news that he had been cast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yesindeed Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 A lot of people elsewhere are complaining that they've never heard of him. I don't really see why that should reflect badly on him. We all know who Jade Goody is but it doesn't mean she would've been good in the role! I don't mind that I don't know him - after all, Tom Baker was an unknown when he took on the role and that went rather well! Baker had been around and done a good bit before the doc Davidson is a better example, he was an unknown You are entirely wrong - Peter Davison was incredibly well known at the time he was cast because he played Tristan in All Creatures Great And Small. Tom Baker was working on a building site when he got the news that he had been cast. it just said it on Confidential that Davidson was widely unknown and Baker was Accomplished check imdb that says it all, look at Baker career before and look at Davidsons anyway no matter, give the kid a chance, no one liked Craig for Bond, no one liked........i'm sure there are others but i cant be smeged looking in up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nosfer2 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 A lot of people elsewhere are complaining that they've never heard of him. I don't really see why that should reflect badly on him. We all know who Jade Goody is but it doesn't mean she would've been good in the role! I don't mind that I don't know him - after all, Tom Baker was an unknown when he took on the role and that went rather well! Baker had been around and done a good bit before the doc Davidson is a better example, he was an unknown You are entirely wrong - Peter Davison was incredibly well known at the time he was cast because he played Tristan in All Creatures Great And Small. Tom Baker was working on a building site when he got the news that he had been cast. it just said it on Confidential that Davidson was widely unknown and Baker was Accomplished check imdb that says it all, look at Baker career before and look at Davidsons anyway no matter, give the kid a chance, no one liked Craig for Bond, no one liked........i'm sure there are others but i cant be smeged looking in up You are arguing with someone who has been a Doctor Who fan for around 30 years and has researched this extensively. If you look carefully at IMDB you will see that it lists series in the wrong order on Peter Davison's page - All Creatures Great and Small started in 1978. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yesindeed Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 A lot of people elsewhere are complaining that they've never heard of him. I don't really see why that should reflect badly on him. We all know who Jade Goody is but it doesn't mean she would've been good in the role! I don't mind that I don't know him - after all, Tom Baker was an unknown when he took on the role and that went rather well! Baker had been around and done a good bit before the doc Davidson is a better example, he was an unknown You are entirely wrong - Peter Davison was incredibly well known at the time he was cast because he played Tristan in All Creatures Great And Small. Tom Baker was working on a building site when he got the news that he had been cast. it just said it on Confidential that Davidson was widely unknown and Baker was Accomplished check imdb that says it all, look at Baker career before and look at Davidsons anyway no matter, give the kid a chance, no one liked Craig for Bond, no one liked........i'm sure there are others but i cant be smeged looking in up You are arguing with someone who has been a Doctor Who fan for around 30 years and has researched this extensively. If you look carefully at IMDB you will see that it lists series in the wrong order on Peter Davison's page - All Creatures Great and Small started in 1978. i did look and i saw that Before the doc Davidson was a one trick pony doing mostly bbc sitcoms, Baker was more varied and dabbed in everything which is what i would personally look for in an actor for a role like the doc but opinions are opinions, you say Davidson i say Baker, its not like one of us is gonna win a prize, with the exception of the older Doctors and Eccilston the Doc isn't a BIG name, atleast thats what i think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyberdrunk Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 (edited) Baker was in a few films before he was cast as Doctor Who, most notably one of the Sinbad ones and a Hammer horror. But he wasn't an household name, so he may have been working on a building site to supplement his income. Tennant, Eccelston and now Matt Smith weren't really heard of until they were cast as The Doctor. Peter DAVISON was in things like All Creatures Great and Small, before he took the role, so he was quite a name, although igronant people still keep spelling it wrong. Although I reckon William Hartnell, Patrick Troughton and Jon Pertwee where as well known as Davison was before they took the role. Oh and it doesn't list 'All Creatures..' wrong in IMBD, the series came back and it does say 1978-1990 near the actors name. Edited January 4, 2009 by cyberdrunk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nosfer2 Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 Oh and it doesn't list 'All Creatures..' wrong in IMBD, the series came back and it does say 1978-1990 near the actors name. You have misunderstood what I am saying. On IMDB it doesn't put the credits in the order in which he first performed his roles. yesindeed does not appear to have recognised this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yesindeed Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 Oh and it doesn't list 'All Creatures..' wrong in IMBD, the series came back and it does say 1978-1990 near the actors name. You have misunderstood what I am saying. On IMDB it doesn't put the credits in the order in which he first performed his roles. yesindeed does not appear to have recognised this. i did, hence why i said he was mostly in BBC sitcoms, Bakers one isn't in order either but its still more impressive than Davisons Baker was all over the place and Davison was in a handful of Sitcoms, i dont think they did to great seeing as me, my fiance, her mum and dad can't remember them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nosfer2 Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 Oh and it doesn't list 'All Creatures..' wrong in IMBD, the series came back and it does say 1978-1990 near the actors name. You have misunderstood what I am saying. On IMDB it doesn't put the credits in the order in which he first performed his roles. yesindeed does not appear to have recognised this. i did, hence why i said he was mostly in BBC sitcoms, Bakers one isn't in order either but its still more impressive than Davisons Baker was all over the place and Davison was in a handful of Sitcoms, i dont think they did to great seeing as me, my fiance, her mum and dad can't remember them You may find it more impressive, but at the time tens of millions watched All Creatures Great and Small whereas comparatively few people had seen the films Tom Baker was in. If you don't believe me you can check back issues of DWM or the Fourth Doctor Handbook by Howe, Stammers and Walker and the Fifth Doctor Handbook by David J Howe and Stephen James Walker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chipwad Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 It'll be an ethnic Doctor! No! It'll be a woman! No! It'll be an ethnic woman with a limp! No! It'll be a Dalek! No! It'll be a David Morrissey! No wait! I read somewhere that Moffat was looking for someone older because we've had two 'younger' Doctors in a row. It'll be Bill Nighy! It'll be Stephen Fry! It'll be ........ it'll be............. it's......a dude that looks like the dude from Twilight. Yaaaay He'll be fine it's just very unremarkable for a remarkable show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators DavidB Posted January 4, 2009 Moderators Share Posted January 4, 2009 I don't think it's fair to say it's 'unremarkable'. What are you basing that on? Or are you someone who believes they should've gone with a black Doctor or a female etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisrus Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 I cant wait to see him in the role. Everyone just needs to give him a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avengers7 Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 I don't think it's fair to say it's 'unremarkable'. What are you basing that on? Or are you someone who believes they should've gone with a black Doctor or a female etc? Maybe they should have! I'm all for giving him a chance as he has an excellent writing team behind him but after months of speculation, I was expecting someone special Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators DavidB Posted January 4, 2009 Moderators Share Posted January 4, 2009 I see absolutely no point in going with 'different' for the sake of being 'different'. I'm against casting someone black because they are black. Same with casting a female because they are female. And that's exactly what it would've been, some stupid political correctness move - "well the Doctor is alien, so the role can obviously be played by..." - and the show shouldn't be about that. In fact NO show should be about that. The Doctor needs to be played by whoever they believe is best for the role. Someone with enthusiasm, an ability to capture the range of emotions the Doctor needs to have, and a quirky yet likeable vibe. Obviously they feel Matt has this. I can imagine him in the role. Far more than I could ever imagine a female doing it, or Patterson Joseph, or others that were rumoured. And my knowledge of the guy is fairly limited. I would've found it more 'unremarkable' to have the show give in to stupid political pressure and end up with a black Doctor just because it's racist that he's always white! Good on them for sticking with someone they believe is simply right for the role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avengers7 Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 I see absolutely no point in going with 'different' for the sake of being 'different'. I'm against casting someone black because they are black. Same with casting a female because they are female. And that's exactly what it would've been, some stupid political correctness move - "well the Doctor is alien, so the role can obviously be played by..." - and the show shouldn't be about that. In fact NO show should be about that. The Doctor needs to be played by whoever they believe is best for the role. Someone with enthusiasm, an ability to capture the range of emotions the Doctor needs to have, and a quirky yet likeable vibe. Obviously they feel Matt has this. I can imagine him in the role. Far more than I could ever imagine a female doing it, or Patterson Joseph, or others that were rumoured. And my knowledge of the guy is fairly limited. I would've found it more 'unremarkable' to have the show give in to stupid political pressure and end up with a black Doctor just because it's racist that he's always white! Good on them for sticking with someone they believe is simply right for the role. Being politically correct is not the issue - there were some excellent actors up for the job - David Morrisay, Patterson Joseph etc - These were far better actors than him! At the end of the day we have all got our opinions but the proof will be his first episode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators DavidB Posted January 4, 2009 Moderators Share Posted January 4, 2009 Sorry but Patterson Joseph was always rumoured because he was black. It was absolutely clear from the media coverage of the rumoured people in line for the role that they were thinking they'd go in a 'different' direction i.e. first black Doctor, or a female Doctor etc. It was never about Patterson Joseph being an ideal actor for the role, nor any female being an ideal actress for the role. And for the record, I can't imagine Patterson Joseph pulling off the Doctor role convincingly anyway, nor any of the females that were rumoured! I don't care that he's black, he just doesn't have 'it' for me, regardless of how good an actor he is. As for people saying there are far better actors out there than Matt .. there's not exactly much to judge him on compared to the careers of some of the others to be honest, so it's not a fair comparison. Plus again, being a good actor doesn't mean they'd be a good Doctor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avengers7 Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 Sorry but Patterson Joseph was always rumoured because he was black. It was absolutely clear from the media coverage of the rumoured people in line for the role that they were thinking they'd go in a 'different' direction i.e. first black Doctor, or a female Doctor etc. It was never about Patterson Joseph being an ideal actor for the role, nor any female being an ideal actress for the role. And for the record, I can't imagine Patterson Joseph pulling off the Doctor role convincingly anyway, nor any of the females that were rumoured! I don't care that he's black, he just doesn't have 'it' for me, regardless of how good an actor he is. As for people saying there are far better actors out there than Matt .. there's not exactly much to judge him on compared to the careers of some of the others to be honest, so it's not a fair comparison. Plus again, being a good actor doesn't mean they'd be a good Doctor. Patterson Joseph is an excellent actor - he would have made a great Doctor. Out of curiosity, who would you have chosen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noddy Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 Sorry but Patterson Joseph was always rumoured because he was black. It was absolutely clear from the media coverage of the rumoured people in line for the role that they were thinking they'd go in a 'different' direction i.e. first black Doctor, or a female Doctor etc. It was never about Patterson Joseph being an ideal actor for the role, nor any female being an ideal actress for the role. And for the record, I can't imagine Patterson Joseph pulling off the Doctor role convincingly anyway, nor any of the females that were rumoured! I don't care that he's black, he just doesn't have 'it' for me, regardless of how good an actor he is. As for people saying there are far better actors out there than Matt .. there's not exactly much to judge him on compared to the careers of some of the others to be honest, so it's not a fair comparison. Plus again, being a good actor doesn't mean they'd be a good Doctor. So you do not think that P.Joseph could pull of the role as Doctor even though you accept he is a good actor. Whereas Matt is perfectly acceptable although " there's not exactly much to judge him on etc....." So the main difference between the two is ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now