Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 reds8n wrote:


...............

2. Stephen Mangan

The star of Green Wing, Dirk Gently and Episodes. Again, he was mentioned by Who people. And before announcement last night, he tweeted this:

............

I don't usually go in for the usual whovian obsessing/navel gazing debates but....

While I appreciate that I'm just biting Bleedin Cool carrots lefts out there to get the unwary, if this comes to pass I will not be able to watch and will have to hand in my multi-coloured scarf at the nearest police phone box.

Or Sue bloody Perkins!

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Peter Dinklage as the Doctor?

We'll sooner see a Catholic sitting on the throne of England once again than an American as Dr. Who.

I say they put Nick Frost in and give everyone the two-finger salute.

James Nesbit would be fantastic. He's shown great range in the past, but the role might be too juvenile for him, depending on how its written. Almost certainly wouldn't do fishfingers and custard.

http://newsthump.com/2013/06/03/rafa-benitez-appointed-interim-doctor-who/

So every week he'll park the bus in front of the Tardis then get Stevie G to kick long-balls at the Daleks. Sounds like a winner!

Well I liked Matt but I look forward to a new one too. The speculation on a new guy is nuts but actually fun lol. I'm for Rupert Grint so he can be Ginger finally.

I think Hurt is not the first or in between doctor or something like that. I think he's the Last Doctor. The one that is dead and buried on that world. We have no idea how many regenerations are between them though. It could have been 10 more for all we know.

 CDK wrote:
I think Hurt is not the first or in between doctor or something like that. I think he's the Last Doctor. The one that is dead and buried on that world. We have no idea how many regenerations are between them though. It could have been 10 more for all we know.

Unlikely. Since we saw no other future doctors in that episode. Also, his outfit is very Paul McGann-y. Ultimately, we'll find out but the whole crux of the dialog in that episode was that he was a Doctor not named the Doctor because of what he did. Which easily slots him in between 8 and 9.

Then who was the Doctor that was the cause of that great war and was dead and buried there? I think it's was that one.

Probably doesn't matter because by the end of it he will probably cease to exist.

 CDK wrote:
Then who was the Doctor that was the cause of that great war and was dead and buried there? I think it's was that one.

Probably doesn't matter because by the end of it he will probably cease to exist.

That one was the final doctor. It is unlikely that the Doctor is going to die anytime soon and they wouldn't actually show the final doctor so that they don't have to dig up a look alike in 50 years.

Marvel Comics seems to have led to the death of the Ponds.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/124571-Guardians-Of-The-Galaxy-Adds-A-Doctors-Companion

Never mind

 NecronLord3 wrote:
It is kinda strange that the Parody featuring Hugh Grant as the 12th doctor still referred to the same planet the Doctor is Buried on by name in the last episode...

You sure about that? I thought it was Tersurus.

 pretre wrote:

 NecronLord3 wrote:
It is kinda strange that the Parody featuring Hugh Grant as the 12th doctor still referred to the same planet the Doctor is Buried on by name in the last episode...

You sure about that? I thought it was Tersurus.

Never mind it was Trenzelor inthe name of the doctor and Zaston IV in the Parody. Sounded the same when I read it.

 pretre wrote:

 CDK wrote:
I think Hurt is not the first or in between doctor or something like that. I think he's the Last Doctor. The one that is dead and buried on that world. We have no idea how many regenerations are between them though. It could have been 10 more for all we know.

Unlikely. Since we saw no other future doctors in that episode. Also, his outfit is very Paul McGann-y. Ultimately, we'll find out but the whole crux of the dialog in that episode was that he was a Doctor not named the Doctor because of what he did. Which easily slots him in between 8 and 9.

Sounds like the most logical choice to me as well, but it's not like the Time War is a secret. Ten talked about it all the time.

 Anung Un Rama wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 CDK wrote:
I think Hurt is not the first or in between doctor or something like that. I think he's the Last Doctor. The one that is dead and buried on that world. We have no idea how many regenerations are between them though. It could have been 10 more for all we know.

Unlikely. Since we saw no other future doctors in that episode. Also, his outfit is very Paul McGann-y. Ultimately, we'll find out but the whole crux of the dialog in that episode was that he was a Doctor not named the Doctor because of what he did. Which easily slots him in between 8 and 9.

Sounds like the most logical choice to me as well, but it's not like the Time War is a secret. Ten talked about it all the time.

He may have talked about it all the time, but was he telling the truth? It always seemed like he was saying how 'it was the only way to end it' when he spoke about wiping out the Time Lords and Daleks, almost as if trying to convince himself of it or justify his actions. Maybe, and it is a big maybe, it wasn't the only way he could have ended it but it was the easiest way? Perhaps he recognised that after the Time War whichever side emerged victorious would end up doing great harm to the rest of the galaxy and so decided to renounce his 'Doctor' status and commit genocide to prevent a possible future?

That's the way I'm looking at how he might fit in, mostly as it always seemed too neat that all the Time Lords and all the Daleks were in one place at the same time so he could easily end the war. If he had to hunt down those that were elsewhere, well, that doesn't seem to Doctor like to me.

Yeah. Whatever he did was for 'peace and sanity'. Hunting down and killing every last time lord and dalek? Certainly might bring peace and sanity, but it is not something that he would want associated with his name.

If he's the last Doctor he could still be taken out of existence at the end of the episode as well. They can change the future so he never becomes that Doctor/Not Doctor. They have shown to be pretty loose with paradoxes and stuff.

He seemed damn proud of what he did in the time war. But what did it accomplish? The Daleks are still active and a threat, he just has his passed off race to fear.

The time war must be a part of it due to what we saw in Journey, but I think there is more to it than the John Hurt being the one involved in the time war.

My question is why does he refer to himself as being 900 years only in the 9th version, and 1000 years old in the tenth when he never lives a full life time in each incarnation? Plus considering time is not even linear to a time lord, it's on odd way to measure existence for them.

 NecronLord3 wrote:
My question is why does he refer to himself as being 900 years only in the 9th version, and 1000 years old in the tenth when he never lives a full life time in each incarnation? Plus considering time is not even linear to a time lord, it's on odd way to measure existence for them.

We do not see all of what happens to the doctor. Between each episode could be years of time where he is travelling or just staring at a wall. We have seen a tiny percentage of his lifetime. That's how 100 years can pass between 9 and 10.

I never understood how a time lord could age. Is 1000 the number of years in total he spent in the tardis?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I never understood how a time lord could age. Is 1000 the number of years in total he spent in the tardis?

It is the number of years he has been alive 'local time'. Meaning if you had a stop watch running from when the doctor was born to right now and you followed him around with it and never left his side, the stop watch would show 1000 years.

 NecronLord3 wrote:
He seemed damn proud of what he did in the time war. But what did it accomplish? The Daleks are still active and a threat, he just has his passed off race to fear.

The time war must be a part of it due to what we saw in Journey, but I think there is more to it than the John Hurt being the one involved in the time war.

My question is why does he refer to himself as being 900 years only in the 9th version, and 1000 years old in the tenth when he never lives a full life time in each incarnation? Plus considering time is not even linear to a time lord, it's on odd way to measure existence for them.

I took it that he did a lot of lone travelling between the Ponds leaving and finding the new one. A Time Lord would be able to measure subjective time at any rate, whatever period of galactic history they went to.

 NecronLord3 wrote:
He seemed damn proud of what he did in the time war. But what did it accomplish? The Daleks are still active and a threat, he just has his passed off race to fear.

The time war must be a part of it due to what we saw in Journey, but I think there is more to it than the John Hurt being the one involved in the time war.

My question is why does he refer to himself as being 900 years only in the 9th version, and 1000 years old in the tenth when he never lives a full life time in each incarnation? Plus considering time is not even linear to a time lord, it's on odd way to measure existence for them.

He was 900 yearsish as the eleventh doctor at the start, then 1000/1100ish> (I forget the exact number) later - he took a 'break' (or was lying, not entirely sure).
But there's a lot of off-screen adventures, a lot of books, and tons of stuff not covered in either format.
Time isn't linear around a time traveler, but their personal timeline is - they still age, and he can mark this progression by X time to establish his age.

 pretre wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I never understood how a time lord could age. Is 1000 the number of years in total he spent in the tardis?

It is the number of years he has been alive 'local time'. Meaning if you had a stop watch running from when the doctor was born to right now and you followed him around with it and never left his side, the stop watch would show 1000 years.

So it refers to his biological age then?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I never understood how a time lord could age. Is 1000 the number of years in total he spent in the tardis?

It is the number of years he has been alive 'local time'. Meaning if you had a stop watch running from when the doctor was born to right now and you followed him around with it and never left his side, the stop watch would show 1000 years.

So it refers to his biological age then?

Yes. When the Doctor says he's 1000 years old, he means biological age as we think of it. Even though he has regenerated multiple times, he's still the same person born 1000 years ago.


Automatically Appended Next Post:


Supposedly the next Doctor. Chiwetel Ejiofor

So, still not ginger then?

Not yet. Unless they give him a wig.

Best candidate for the role of the Doctor.

Well, it does seem that turning the tardis off and on again helps...

Looks asian


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ovion wrote:

 NecronLord3 wrote:
He seemed damn proud of what he did in the time war. But what did it accomplish? The Daleks are still active and a threat, he just has his passed off race to fear.

The time war must be a part of it due to what we saw in Journey, but I think there is more to it than the John Hurt being the one involved in the time war.

My question is why does he refer to himself as being 900 years only in the 9th version, and 1000 years old in the tenth when he never lives a full life time in each incarnation? Plus considering time is not even linear to a time lord, it's on odd way to measure existence for them.

He was 900 yearsish as the eleventh doctor at the start, then 1000/1100ish> (I forget the exact number) later - he took a 'break' (or was lying, not entirely sure).
But there's a lot of off-screen adventures, a lot of books, and tons of stuff not covered in either format.
Time isn't linear around a time traveler, but their personal timeline is - they still age, and he can mark this progression by X time to establish his age.

I would accept that except that he isn't reborn a child. So you can knock of like 20 years at least per incarnation, not to mention the incarnations that die within a few years of that. We see the incarnations age relatively normally, and I accept the possibility that time lords age differently, I just think its a stretch for him to claim an age of 1000 years, just because he's on his 11th incarnation. An age of around 300-500 years seems more reasonable without further explanation. But don't get me wrong, I accept this fiction and do not desire explanation, I learned my lesson with Star Wars and Star Trek, so things just require a suspension of disbelief.