-------------------- "I am an almost extinct breed, an old-fashioned gentleman, which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-bitch when it suits me." --Jubal Harshaw
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Oh, come on, they do this every six months. It's usually a ploy to sell the latest episodes released on DVD (formerly video, laserdisc, etc. . .). Then of course there are the 'lost episodes' they make so much of finding all the time, never mind that they'd never have been lost if the BBC had bothered to maintain decent archives in the first place. . .
posted
Actually, I think they're actualy serious this time; BBC Worldwide (The BBc's commercial arm-which owns the rights) has given BBC 1 permission to do it and they've given up trying to persuade Hollywood to make a film. Personally, I think they should have gone to Bollywood...
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
1. Paul McGann or nothing 2. There is no audience for it atm - the Sci Fi/Fan genre is over-saturated. Although UK Sci Fi?? 3. Paul McGann or nothing 4. Those funky huge, elaborate, beautiful sets from the TV movie.
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
For the 1999 Comic Relief Red Nose Day, they filmed a short one-off spoof which started off with Rowan Atkinson as the Doctor, only to have him repeatedly killed and regenerated as, among others, Jim Broadbent and Richard E Grant. All of them were brilliant and I could easily see any of them playing the Doctor.
posted
Richard E. Grant, Paul McGann and Alan davies are among the possibles. Unless they completely screw it up I imagine people will watch it anyway, despite the 'saturation' of the sci-fi market- it is Dr Who, after all.
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
But the problem is they treat all SF shows the same way. Remember Bugs? Remember Crime Traveller? That really sucked. Remember the new Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased)? That should have been relegated to a one-off Red Nose Day sketch, the idea - Vic Reeves and Bob Mortimer as Hopkirk and Randall, respectively - was good but the execution sorely lacked. Or how about the later Red Dwarf? Ugh.
That said, everyone seemed quite impressed by Strange though I never watched it myself.
If ony they'd made more Ultraviolet, that was quite good. But by C4 not the BBC.
posted
I've been checking out the flash animated Dr.Who occasionaly and the never filmed script. It would be nice if it came back as a well written and well filmed continuation of the series. It was one of the few Sci Fi series on TV when I was growing up. There was alot of reality to escape from back then. The good Doctor had the cure.
[ September 26, 2003, 09:00 AM: Message edited by: Mountain Man ]
IP: Logged
posted
Of course, we're still waiting for Anthony Stewart Head in the US-UK joint venture Ripper show. Though anyone holding their breath for it must be turning blue by now. I halfway suspect the reason the BBC made Strange was that they panicked upon realising they would have to make a decent SF show and actually support and promote it, so rushed out something similar so they could then claim they didn't want to repeat themselves.
posted
Lee, you're completely right, or course (although series 8 of Red Dwarf was far better than series 7).
And you didn't miss much with Strange; it was just bad. I really can't see why anyone was impressed with it (although I know people who did think it was quite good).
-------------------- "I am an almost extinct breed, an old-fashioned gentleman, which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-bitch when it suits me." --Jubal Harshaw
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Plus, the Red Dwarf movie actually beings filming next month. After a mere two and a half year build up. Crazy.
Are they going to maintain continuity with the old show (and movie)? Because if they are, and ignoring the Comic Relief special, we'll be up to the 9th doctor. Only 5 more to go. Or is it 4? (I can never remember if a Time Lord has 13 lives, or he can regenerate 13 times). Although, I suppose, coming up with a tech way around that wouldn't be too hard.
Richard E Grant! Come on, he's done nothing good for ages. And it'll stop him making Argos Adverst.
I liked the new Randall and Hobkirk (Deceased). You are clearly wrong Lee. Bad boy.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
As far as I can remember the Time lords can regenerate 13 times. Wasn't there a late Mcoy epsidoe where he has to stop the Master, who had used up all his regenerations, trying to use some sort of gas to allow himself another 13 regenerations? I remember some speculation at the time that as the Doctor had been near the gas it ment that he had another 13 regenerations.
Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
A time lord has twelve regenerations, meaning thirteen incarnations. McGann is/was number nine.
In "Survival", the episode in question, I don't think the Master was after additional lives per se... I think he was just infected by those cheetah people or something. The Master by that time was on his fourteenth incarnation, having stolen an additional life by taking that of Tremas waaaay back in the late days of the fourth Doctor. His fifteenth incarnation was briefly seen being exterminated by the Daleks in the Doctor Who TV movie, whereupon his "remains" got a sixteenth body in the form of Eric Roberts. By this time, the Master was barely Gallifreyan anymore by most accounts, having used many different methods in attempts to extend his life.
Point being I guess that if and when the Doctor gets to his thirteenth incarnation (and I hope they actually do something about the Valeyard at that point), he'll have no problem getting additional lives, and probably without having to take them as the Master did. It's sci-fi, after all.
posted
Who in fuck are Richard E. Grant or Paul McGann?
Hoookay! Paul McGann is my choice: he really WAS good in that terrible movie version (althoufg he needs a leaf blower for his Tardis). Richard E. Grant might make a good Master though.
RObert Palmer could be Davros!
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
