Potential Doctor Who Shake up(Status Quo Remains)

[The Romulan Republic]

I don't know the old series Doctors as well (though from what I've seen, none of the Doctors, old series or new, was played by a poor actor), but for the new series:

Nine is my favourite as a character, probably.

Ten is... well, Tennant just has so much energy and enthusiasm that, hammy as he can be at times, its pretty much impossible not to like him.

Eleven was when I really got into the show, the one I probably know the best, so I have a particular attachment to him.

Twelve is the best acted, I think, as I said.

And War Doctor is played by John Hurt. Enough said.

[Crazedwraith]

Not necessarily wrong. Could be "two conflicting sources of information"?

But I hope the new report is correct.

Not sure why you feel the need to take an obvious thinly-veiled cheap shot at me over it, in any case.

Because 1) You were wrong.
2) Even if you were right, it wasn't necessarily for the reasons you thought, which were idiotic and shrill
3) Even if were right about it happening and why, the show wouldn't necessarily have been bad.

So basically you fail on all levels. And I have no reason not to take the piss out of you and your panicky 'I'm so more pc and progressive than thou' bullshite.

[The Romulan Republic]

Look, I really don't want to derail this thread because some asshole decided to start a pissing contest with me (I get enough of that shit in the News and Politics forum, thank you), but:

1. Like I said, what we have right now is two competing stories. Is their any reason to regard one as more credible than the other, other than one favouring your position?

2. My reasons were based on what was stated in the OP article- it was very obvious, presuming that story was correct, who was being pandered to and what era of the show they were going to emulate.

As to my tone, that's somewhat subjective and I don't really care weather you like it or not.

3. No, it wouldn't necessarily have been bad, but it would have been a move in the wrong direction, and contrary to the willingness to change that has been key to Who's success throughout its history.

4. It is not "panicky" to think that something is a bad idea, and to state so in strong terms. People accuse me of panicking every time I have a strong objection to something, and its a straw man I have grown very, very tired of. Not liking something, even hating it, is not the same as panicking about it.

Honestly, as much as I love Who, I'm not invested enough in it to feel panic over it.

5. So you're one of those people who whines about anyone being progressive being "PC". In my experience, that's usually code for some variation on "how dare you call out my bigotry" or "women/minorities make me feel uncomfortable/threatened".

6. The reasons I support a female Doctor and don't want to see an endless pattern of "male lead, pretty young female sidekick" (I presume that's what you're whining about) are not limited to "political correctness". One, I genuinely find the current status quo to be at least slightly sexist. Two, As I have stated previously, I think that the former would tie very well into the themes of the show (if done by a good writer), and the latter is just a case of wanting the show to think outside the box and not rehash the same notes forever. Thirdly... why the hell not? Their is not objective reason in Doctor Who why you can't have a female Doctor, or a different casting of the companion, so why should you restrict who gets a chance to audition for those roles?

If you want to argue against me, argue against what I actually said, and my actual reasons for it.

[Iroscato]

Not necessarily wrong. Could be "two conflicting sources of information"?

But I hope the new report is correct.

Not sure why you feel the need to take an obvious thinly-veiled cheap shot at me over it, in any case.

Because 1) You were wrong.
2) Even if you were right, it wasn't necessarily for the reasons you thought, which were idiotic and shrill
3) Even if were right about it happening and why, the show wouldn't necessarily have been bad.

So basically you fail on all levels. And I have no reason not to take the piss out of you and your panicky 'I'm so more pc and progressive than thou' bullshite.

Had a bad day, or something?

[Crazedwraith]

stuff

Hey i wasn't going to bring in other threads but you ever wonder what the common theme of all your pissing contests is? It's you. Maybe you should try to figure what makes everyone want to metaphorically punch you in the face.

We have two competing stories one of which is from a newspaper which Hilary points has a long history of bullshitting about Doctor Who. Which one should we place more credance with you think? Or we could just wait and see for solid news.

2 your reasons were bull as ive already argued. Young man with young girl companion describes the majority of who canon not just tennants era. Which answer point 2 and 3. If you welcome change then it has to be change forward and back. Young and old anything.

Again if people constantly get you wrong. The flaw is with you as to Pc and progessive. Its amazing how enfuriated you can get me harping on about points generally agree with. It would be cool to have a black or female doctor. It would also be a massive risk. Risks can go bad as well as good and i dont think its reasonable to say the BBC has to take the risk or unreasonable to not expect them to. I think this section.

I hope this addresses all your 'points' I think it does and doesnt mistepresent them as ever uf it doesnt this was accidental and not out of malice. Which really should be takenxas read. Apologies for typos I'm on my phone.