Boy, this takes me back... The writing, pacing and dialogue are all classic Who. The animation, such as it is, is also quite impressive. While we're waiting for the REAL ninth Doctor (whoever it is) to make his debut in 2005, this will do quite nicely.
Mark
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I'd never really seen any "Dcotor Who" before, but I've been looking into it recently, and I'm wondering... Is this animated fellow supposed to be the same as Doctor #8, or is he #9 and the new show will feature #10? Or is this cartoon going to be considered completely apocryphal?
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
The "Shalka" Doctor is a ninth Doctor concocted when it looked like the BBC would never resurrect the TV series - it was well into production when they suddenly announced that it would. Thus, the cartoon will become apocryphal when the new 2005 TV series airs.
It's hardly the first time they've done it: a ficitious fourth Doctor starred in a Doctor Who play during the hiatus between Job Pertwee and Tom Baker, and Peter "Tarkin" Cushing played the first(ish) Doctor in the two Dalek movies in the 60s. There are also a current series of audio books featuring a number of unnumbered "what if" Doctors in a variety of dark and depressing situations.
IMO, the "Shalka" Doctor doesn't seem TOO different in appearance or general personality than Paul McGann's eighth Doctor. I'd accept that this one could be an adventure from an older and more mature eigth Doctor, though that depends on who's going to play the guy in the new BBC series. McGann is a possibility, as is Richard E. Grant, the voice of this ninth Doctor (who also played an imaginary TENTH Doctor in the Doctor Who comedy spoof "The Curse of Fatal Death" - but that's another story altogether).
Mark
Posted by AVON (Member # 1186) on :
"TREVOR MARTIN" played, a version of our favourite TIMLORD in a 1974 play running in the west end of London. (He actually was a "TIMELORD" in the last, "PAT TROUGHTON" story "THE WAR GAMES"!)
So, depending on who the next tv DOCTOR is "RICHARD E. GRANT" is unofficially the 9th with, "PAUL McGANN" the 8th - so, far!!!
But, no-one has made a distinction between the actor's doing the "DOCTOR" on tv. film or, stage - in which case PETER CUSHING is film DOC no 1, PAUL McGANN is film Doc no 2 - either way, it doesn't matter too much - but would be nice to see McGANN take the role if, just to keep the regenerations on tv correct!!!
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
HOORAY, for, "CAPITAL, LETTERS", "COMMAS", and "QUOTATION, MARKS",!!!
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I'm still confused that you've never seen Doctor Who, and yet you have a quote from the series in your sig.
And, although I am loathe to bring up the word, I think that we can declare the Cushing Doctor as being "non-canon".
*scrubs himself clean*
Yuck. Anyway, he calls himself "Doctor Who", he says that he is human, and that he invented the TARDIS (sorry, Tim, but that has to be capitalised). There's really no way he can link to the TV Doctor as we know him. Same for any stage Doctors.
McGann, on the other hand, was directly shown to be the Doctor after McCoy. And apart from the whole "half human" thing, the film easily follows on from the TV series.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I'm familiar with the acronymic nature of the word "TARDIS".
And my post above specifically mentions that I had been (and, in fact, I still am) watching the show. I simply hadn't seen more than one episode of the show before I took an interest in it, which was not long before I made that post.
So, in conclusion, nyah.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Ahh. Fair enough. Where are you watching from? Because to go from the beginning all the way through would:
1/ take a long time, and
2/ be, er, impossible, due to missing episodes and whatnot.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Randomly. Whatever episodes I'm able to download. And I recently realized I could get a few on video from the library.
I've mostly seen Tom Baker episodes. A few Hartnell episodes, too. Two or three each of Pertwee and Davison. Also one Troughton and one Colin Baker. And the movie.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Day of the Daleks is Pertwee, isn't it? Is that the one which actually has some actual time travel in it as part of the story?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Yes. The Daleks are controlling Earth in the twenty-somethingth century, and a band of rebels go back to the 1970s, thinking they can prevent the moment everything went downhill, but the Doctor figures out that their time-meddling is actually what caused the problem in the first place.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Oddly enough, one of the best things about Doctor Who was that time travel often had little to do with the show. Inasmuch as Trek uses a starship to take us to the drama, the TARDIS does the same, but rarely was used as a plot point itself. It's not all to frequent the Doctor went back to change things, or big paradoxes, or whatever; indeed, the mechanics of the Doctor Who universe were so varied and changing that the only real constant was that police box!
Mark
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Yup. And, thinking about it, surely "Time and Again" is merely Trek's version of "Day of the Daleks"?
Posted by AVON (Member # 1186) on :
Right, recarding "PETER CUSHING'S" version of the "DOCTOR" - it is as much part of the "DW" cannon as is, the (naff awful 1996 Movie with the half-Human, "PAUL McGANN" version).
The only reason that, "PETER" did those two movies:
DR. WHO AND THE DALEKS.
DALEK INVASION 2150AD.
Is simply because, "WILLIAM HARTNEL" was too busy with the filming the tv series and, therefore, couldn't do both. Remeber that back then "DW" was not only done live but, was done 50 out of 52 weeks (with only a break for Christmas). Also, both the stories used were versions of tv ones, anyway.
Plus, "PETER" wasn't in particularly good health when, he was asked to do the second movie but, becuase he'd enjoyed doing the first so much - he wanted to do the second.
The first film, was a copy of the first story that our little pepper-pots appeared in called: "THE DALEKS" (a 7-parter by, "TERRY NATION" shown on tv between, 21/12/63 to 1/02/64)and, the second was a copy of "THE DALEK INVASION OF EARTH" (a 6-parter again by, "TERRY NATION" shown on tv between, 21/11/64 to 26/12/64).
His "DOCTOR" was made more Human to appeal to a wider audience than just those already interested in "DW" and, so they made him more of a kindly, Grandfather figure call "DOCTOR WHO" who, was also an inventor. Hence, him saying he'd invented the "TARDIS". Plus the interior was also different because of that.
In any case the two films came on the back of the DALEK-mania at the time back in 1965!!!
So, these films have as much right to be cannonical in the history of "DW" as does the recent enjoyable webcast "SCREAM OF THE SHALKA"!!! Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote: our favourite TIMLORD
Ah, ha! So the secret is out. Not that many of us are surprised. Tim is the lord, after all.
Posted by Ultra Magnus (Member # 239) on :
This guy is weird.
Posted by AVON (Member # 1186) on :
Ultra Magnus
quote:This guy is weird.
WHO says I'm a Male!!! Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Certainly not me.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by AVON: Right, recarding "PETER CUSHING'S" version of the "DOCTOR" - it is as much part of the "DW" cannon as is, the (naff awful 1996 Movie with the half-Human, "PAUL McGANN" version).
Except that, er, the 1996 movie is part of the canon. And the two 60s Dalek movies blatantly are not. There shouldn't even be an argument here.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"WHO says I'm a Male!!!"
Oh, no. It's discovered boldface...
Anyway, you have a picture of a man in your profile.
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
Perhaps that's what the final appearance should look like after the hormone therapy and plastic surgery.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"Anyway, you have a picture of a man in your profile."
Not just ANY, man but, "AVON"!!!
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
DING DONG!......AVON calling....
Posted by AVON (Member # 1186) on :
YES - I do have my favourite character's photo AVON up in my profile for, the same reason I use AVON as my username!!!
However, doesn't mean to say I'm automatically a MALE does it. How d'you know I'm not a FEMALE - Simple, YOU DON'T and, I'm not saying, either. Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Ok.
I've tried not to do this, mostly because I honestly don't give a crap. But here we go: The "ALL CAPS AND QUOTATION THING"... I don't know why, but it's building in me this immense rage. I'm also confused as to it's purpose. It takes longer to type and it's not correct writing. Nothing is ever all caps except acronyms and names and characters are not put in quotes. If you want to quote "Movie Titles", "TV Show Titles", or "Episode Titles", I'm down with that, but I feel like I'm reading a Google results page.
Ok... back to my Philly Steak.
Oh yah... Doctor Who... I've been slowly making my way through the epsiode list on the BBC's site. I think I'm up to the fourth Doctor. I remember watching eps on PBS with a friend of mine when we were in junior high. I think they put a bunch of episodes together and ran, like, four hour movies every Friday night. I never could stay awake for the whole thing.
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
quote:Originally posted by AVON: YES - I do have my favourite character's photo AVON up in my profile for, the same reason I use AVON as my username!!!
However, doesn't mean to say I'm automatically a MALE does it. How d'you know I'm not a FEMALE - Simple, YOU DON'T and, I'm not saying, either.
Wow...AND gender identity issues... Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"However, doesn't mean to say I'm automatically a MALE does it. How d'you know I'm not a FEMALE - Simple, YOU DON'T and, I'm not saying, either."
But you didn't ask for proof of your masculinity (which I'm sure is hard to find, regardless of your gender). You asked "WHO says I'm a Male!!!". And the answer is that your profile says you're male, by implying that a picture of a man is a picture of you.
By the way, I use the word "ask" loosely. If you hold down the key on your keyboard that says "Shift" on it, and then press the key with the '?' symbol on it, you can type a question mark. It is customary to type this character at the end of an interrogative sentence, in place of the period.
Posted by AVON (Member # 1186) on :
TSN
quote:But you didn't ask for proof of your masculinity (which I'm sure is hard to find, regardless of your gender). You asked "WHOsays I'm a Male!!!" And the answer is that your profile says you're a male, by implying that a picture of a man is a picture of you.
CORRECT- I didn't ask for proof of my gender, hence, I didn't need to use a question(???) mark. I was merely, stating that I wasn't or, might not necessarily be the gender that you assumed, OK!
I'm still not saying, either.
Also, WHY does having a photo of my favourite MALE "B7" character "AVON" have to mean I can't use it if I am a, FEMALE not, a MALE"B7" FAN??? It doesn't.
Gender has nothing to do with whose avatar you use, as far as, I'm concerned!!! Posted by Identity Crisis (Member # 67) on :
quote:Originally posted by AVON: Remeber that back then "DW" was not only done live but, was done 50 out of 52 weeks (with only a break for Christmas).
Doctor Who was never broadcast live. It was always pre-recorded. I think the closest they ever came was during one Pertwee when they were still working on the music on the morning of the day of broadcast.
During the Hartnell years recording was two months ahead of broadcast at the start of a season, falling to only three weeks or so ahead by the end of the season.
Broadcasts ran for about ten months out of twelve whilst recording was almost continuous throughout the year (with location recording taking place several weeks before studio recording, thus leading to the recording of stories and even seasons overlapping).
Season one: Nov '63 to Sept '64 (recorded Sept '63 to Aug '64) Season two: Oct '64 to Jul '65 (recorded Jun '64 to Jul '65) Season three: Sept '65 to Jul '66 (recorded Jun '65 to Jul '64)
There was no break in broadcast for Christams. One episode (part 7 of The Daleks' Master Plan) was broadcast on Christmas Day 1965 and include one scene where William Hartnell turned to the camera and wished the audience a merry christmas.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I wonder if it was referring to the fact that the show was filmed with single takes, because it was too expensive to film multiple takes of a shot and edit it in post-production.
Posted by Identity Crisis (Member # 67) on :
Maybe, but the "it was live" myth has been doing the rounds for ages despite being easily proved false by consulting any of the many books or web sites about the production of the series.
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
quote:Originally posted by AVON: [Gender has nothing to do with whose avatar you use, as far as, I'm concerned!!!
ONCE AGAIN...obvious gender identity issues.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Identity Crisis: Maybe, but the "it was live" myth has been doing the rounds for ages despite being easily proved false by consulting any of the many books or web sites about the production of the series.
Along with the "Hartnell ad-libbed the 'Happy Christmas to you at home' thing and really ticked off the producers" rumour.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)