Dr Who scores new companion from Emmerdale Former Emmerdale actress Jenna-Louise Coleman has been selected to play the latest assistant to Gallifreyan Time Lord Dr Who, beginning with the 50th anniversary Christmas special at the end of the year. Coleman is best known for her four-year stint as Jasmine Thomas, the recalcitrant school-girl turned journalist who battered …
> Have you ever seen her apart from such roles.
Oh yes, unfortuantely. She's unmistakable, since she only knows how to be Billy Piper, and has that toe-curling estuary bleat in every role. As Dorothy Parker once said (of Katherine Hepburn?) she can run a whole gamut of emotions, from A to B.
Right - as I thought. Despite you saying you've seen her in varied roles, you plainly haven't. Here's an interview with her where you can hear her actual, natural voice. She's not quite the Queen, but she's pretty far from the character and voice she plays as Rose. The way she talks in Doctor Who is NOT her natural voice, this is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kk34lKIa5aE&feature=related
And me. When the Doctor's flippancy was a protective mask for deep feeling it worked well. Now that it simply masks infantile stupidity it does not. And as for the Debilitating Duo; well, they all suit each other, don't they?
I tried to like it, and persevered until I was expected to believe that the gormless Amy had a greater understanding of a deep, most complex cosmic issue than a 900 year-old Time Lord. Then I reached for the OFF button.
The prospect of a new companion who not only looks like the Awful Amy but sounds even more obnoxious is not likely to encourage me back.
Tennant was great. But so is Matt Smith. When he's given good episodes, he's actually great. But after enjoying most of Season 5 a lot (finalé was a bit magicy-wagicy), Season 6 was mostly awful. I'm really tired of Stephen Moffat projecting his sexual fetishes onto the story. He clearly has a thing for males being bossed around / made fools of / upstaged by females. I don't care about that in general, but the Doctor is supposed to be the brilliant character in this and maybe for those who want to fantasize about River Song, they like that. But seeing the violent psychopath (she even does that stupid shooting people behind her without looking thing) drag around the lead character like she's his spoiled younger mistress just really undermines the character and makes it harder for people to respect him / relate to him. I have this horrible feeling that Moffat thinks he's doing women a favour in showing an over-powering female character repeatedly treat the Doctor like dirt. Hint: that's about as enticing as it would be for a male audience to see, I don't know, a male lover continually upstage and belittle Lara Croft. Guys wouldn't go "Ooh, I feel empowered because someone of my gender is upstaging the sexy lead I like". Same thing with women and the Doctor. (Note: general comment - countless exceptions exist and no-doubt will say so).
Ugh. After watching a YouTube interview with her, I have drawn the conclusion that Rebecca Black has been cast in this role. She did "excitement, excitement" ("we so excited") and also "fun" ("fun fun fun"). I question her judgment in saying that the current cast is her favorite as well -- obviously the best Doctor/companion duo was Pertwee with Jo Grant -- but more importantly, she *likes* the snivel fest that Moffat has dumped on us? At least Karen Gillan is my type, but really a good companion should hold an advanced degree in science and/or (believable) ass-kicking.
She's young, I think we can forgive her a little display of excitement about being offered the Companion role on one of our most iconic TV shows. Us old farts and fartessas who've been offered that role *hundreds* of times are bound to get a bit blasé about it, and forget how exciting it all was the first time.
:-P
Are you kidding? Even if you restrict yourself to the Pertwees then I'd still pick either of the others above Jo Grant. And I wouldn't even go Pertwee if given free choice — his stuff always appears to be self consciously trite.
Sadly for us, it doesn't appear that having strong opinions in this area is helpful in securing the job.
Fine-- pick Liz or Sarah Jane or even another Doctor. That's not really what's at stake, even if my tastes are a bit trite. My point was just that she's picked easily one of the worst eras in Doctor Who. The most hopeful reading sees this as just sucking up to the boss, but I know there are plenty of people out there who genuinely like the current state of fandom-as-canon. I'm disappointed that someone can accept and even praise a decline from Holmes's intended audience of mature adolescents to the current emotionally-stunted [age of Moffat's kid] year-olds.
You're right that it isn't helpful in getting the job. It shouldn't be either. Some of the better actors on uber-fan series have come to the role without knowing much if anything about their larger fictional universes, and most of the Who geeks I know would make for horrible actors. My complaint isn't that she's wrong about who the best Doctor and companion are, it's that if she thinks the current series is just fine, she'll uncritically accept scripts as bad as the ones that are on now. To be clear, I've been OK with Matt Smith from the start. He fits the role quite well, but the stories and dialogue he has to work with generally are no good, and he likes the current state of things, so no one's saying, "are you serious?" to the showrunners.
I think I was overly negative before; to pick a favourite set I'd go Baker + Sarah Jane + Harry. I seriously considered Troughton + Jamie but couldn't pick a favourite third (or third and fourth).
That being said, another thing I can't be that negative about is the current cast, as I think they're all excellent. I'm not willing to say the same about the stories. I'm finding one or two episodes a year to be really good television and most of the rest to be, well, like they want to be Lost but without any discipline. If you're going to invest in story arcs then there's only so many times you can cheat the audience by answering a question with a question or by inserting some get out of jail free nuance into established events before it just becomes impossible to suspend disbelief.
Nope, while it is true that Baker actually married V2, her portrayal was greatly inferior to V1. V1 actually exceeded the doctor in knowledge and skill, at least in the first episodes before the writers started dumbing her down. By V2 the transformation was complete except for an occasional throw-away. And I think V1 was the prettier of the two too.
This post has been deleted by its author
After Russell T Davies finished writing/directing... it went down-hill.
When Dr Who was brought back with Christopher Eccleston there was some quite brilliant sub-plots woven through the series. Bad Wolf, The Face of Bow, The Dr Donna, The ever beating drums, must rank as exceptional story telling.. but the gradual development of the messiah complex meant it was always going to be hard to continue (without wandering into heresy of Dr Who was Jesus).
Without the Epiphany, the story has hit a wall just died and should be given a decent burial..
.. but when’s the next series of Torchwood coming round?
> Torchwood = too many gay references
If you were to believe a certain serial pirate bay commenter, Dr. Who (or should that be Doctor? Let's forget branding for now) is a BBC conspiracy to turn everyone into "teh gay".
I'd protest, but after watching a few episodes of the new Dr. Who, I've turned into "the only gay in the village". BTW, that /is/ Tom Baker doing VO there isn't it? I smell a rat --- you might even say I smell a cyber-rat!
Unfortunately the last Torchwood (Miracle Day) was a disaster IMNSHO. Could have told the story in 4 episodes and maybe been OK. 10 episodes was too long and boring. Even Children of Earth was better. I had to force myself to finish watching Miracle Day - I got really bored after episode 3.
Bring back the original Torchwood concept and it'll be better.
RTD wrote nicely paced episodes, and was quite good with building tension and climax etc. The main problem was he was hopeless at science fiction, drifting more into fantasy fiction much of the time.
Just compare some of the plot lines like in the early Tennent episode an alien race enslaved half a populous by "blood group control", to one of the better Moffat episodes like The Empty Child or Blink...
They brought out new Daleks so that Karen and Matt would be eye-to-eye-stalk with the new Daleks. I don't know for sure but I think Ms Coleman is much shorter so I have to wonder if this will mean ANOTHER reinvention of the Daleks to match the new TARDIS crew heights.
Either that or Ms Coleman is going to be on stilts when she meets Daleks.
This post has been deleted by its author
Poor old Bonnie. Actually a decent actress ever tarred with the Violet Elizabeth brush. The writing for her character in Doctor Who was awful as was the direction.
Shame really as in the audio adventures she has recorded more recently Ms Langford really shines and shows what might have been possible with some decent writing and direction.
Yep - she's really great on the audios. Particularly when pared with Seven in something like Bang-Bang-A-Boom. (One I thought I would hate but after endless positive comments actually tried). Six is another Doctor who comes across better on the audios in some ways than was given the opportunity to do on screen.
For anyone who is interested in the Doctor Who audios by Big Finish - stand out ones to try would be Davros, Jubilee, and The Holy Terror.
"that's it Doctor, if you thought you could disappear for years and then come back and make it up again with a bag of toffees(*) then you're wrong. Clear off, we never want to see you again"
Now, that should do it.
(*) by using a bag of toffees instead of jelly babies this does leave open an option for a later series where this Doctor is revealed to be a replicant Doctor that Amy and Rory need to defeat so that they can release the real Doctor and "save the universe"(tm) in case they producers decide they need to bring them back
McCoy and Ace were great, but I'll still give the edge to Baker and either Ramana v1 or Leela.
It still pisses me off the Beeb were clearly intent on killing the show when McCoy had the role. I've heard better soundtracks on Hanna Barbara cartoons.
And okay, maybe I am just a crazy 'Merkin, but I really liked the shows better when they had the feel of the monarchy back on Galifrey. It made them different, and therefore that much more enjoyable.
"It's not often the Doctor meets someone who can talk even faster than he does, but it's about to happen"
In the last couple of years I've had a feeling that some of the Doctor's rants are deliberately thrown out at super-speed simply because there's a hole in the plot that needs to be explained away by something unbelievably technical that only the Doctor can understand. It's ANNOYING. Slow down already, what's the point of writing dialogue if it can't be understood?
James, I would enquire as to what age you are and how long you've been watching Dr Who because it's been like that from day 1. Reverse the polarity, there's a kink in the whachametrusses etc etc. My wife doesn't get how much I love Dr Who when I pick plot holes all over the place in any other TV show; it's because Dr Who doesn't need to make sense. It's about a guy travelling through all of space and time in a blue box that's bigger on the inside. What part of that makes sense??
It's just a laugh - let goooooooooooo.
This post has been deleted by its author
It's not as good as it was in my day blah blah blah blah....wipe your chins and take off the rose tinted glasses. Any of you ACTUALLY gone back and watched any of the old Doctor Who stories? I've loved Dr Who since I was about 4 (30 years now) and EVERY SINGLE TIME it changes people whine and moan, some like it some don't, some claim they don't watch/won't watch anymore etc etc etc. Well guess what? It's the longest running Sci Fi show on TV EVER. For a good reason, it keeps evolving, keeps changing.
I wasn't sure about Christopher Eccleston, then I watched him and although he was a bit wooden at times (Have you got that) I thought he brought somehting totally different to the role, I really thought David Tennant would be terrible but he wasn't and when Matt Smith was announced I thought "He's too young" until I saw him in the role and now I think he's probably the best doctor since Tom Baker.
Quit your whining, make constructive comments where possible and if you really don't like it anymore, don't watch it, nobody is making you. Anyway, it's not supposed to be for you, it's supposed to be for kids so get a grip.
PS, new girl looks hot, can't wait to see her in the TARDIS
Yes, I watched Tom Baker in The Genesis of the Daleks and it's still fantastic all these years later.
Best parts are Davros interviewing the Dr and saying how he would be happy to release a virus that would destroy all life in the universe, and the Dr worrying about the ethics of destroying the Daleks who brought peace to warring planets by forcing them to work together. Some actual intelligence, and not much silliness. Also scientists getting slaughtered by the bucketload - these Daleks don't have designer colours, they look like armoured killing machines and show it.
(OK, so Sarah Jane and Harry wonder around getting captured, and the killer clam is a bit dodgy).
Now, Genesis of the Daleks I have to grant you is an excellent series of episodes. The reason I asked the question, though, is that I too had been watching some old episodes just out of nostalgia/curiosity and whilst there was the odd gem like that there were far too many incomprehensible stories and improbable aliens with so much bad RADA acting and terrible sets, as well the most tedious direction and timing that you simply lose interest.
I would love to see some more high brow stories during a series but if you look at the Almost People what is that other than an investigation into what makes us people? That was a very creepy and clever duplex; The Doctor's wife, very clever and interesting adn, although some people didn't like it, the stories that carry across the arc of the Silence and the Question are fantastic. Remember that all of that was trailed in Matt Smith's very first episode "Silence, Doctor, Silence will fall". Oh, and even the mildly annoying Britain on a ship episode had an undertone of animal welfare and moral judgements.
Yes I have. Two nights ago as a matter of fact: The Three Doctors downloaded from Netflix.
I'd buy DVDs of the old shows if the Beeb would just have the decency to repackage them in season sets and sell them at the same price as they sell the current ones. Right now I only have them on aging VHS tapes from when they use to run on PBS.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
