|
|
Post by medicusitic on Dec 3, 2023 20:26:39 GMT
Hang on. What am I reading…?  As unlike the original character and arguably miscast as Eccleston was, precisely how was Jodie (“Fam! Are Ya Ed Sheeran?!”) Whittaker better in the part, or closer to the classic Doctor? Jodie is pretending to be Tennich (who was trying to be a mix of Tom Baker and Davidson) and Smith (who was a poor intimidation of the 2nd Doctor), with a bit of a sterotype of Tom Baker. Its really bad and I really dislike Jodie from what I have seen, but I can see that its trying to be Doctor Who and there is an attempt at a character. While the 9th Doctor was nothing no one can define his character because he has no character he literally changes from a five year old in some scenes, to edgy emo teenager, to very brief "Doctor like moments", to guy who stands around smiling. He character isnt consistent in episodes or between episodes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2023 22:51:34 GMT
Didn't Eccleston lose four million viewers over the course of his series?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2023 22:55:35 GMT
This.
( I agree, as much as I dislike Whittaker as the Doctor, she's still preferable to Eccelston). I think disliking the 9th Doctor is basically one thing you cannot do in the Doctor Who space, and I see no reason as to why. Whittaker at the very least WANTED to be there and you can tell she is trying to do act doctorish (its more like a parody of the 10th, 4th,and various other doctors). But the 9th Doctor is basically nothing, there is no consistent character. I have looked up videos/reddit posts/forum posts that are anti 9th Doctor and I can only find posts asking why people hate the 9th Doctor, but I never saw this "hate". Its purely due to nostalgia Series 1 and 2 hold up worse than the 60s show, parts of the 70s show, and parts of the 80s show.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=StB9sJXtHyw Here are the best 9th doctor moments and notice how most of them he has not dialogue, just standing around, and it centers on the other characters because they are far more interesting. At 7:00 minutes we see him see "Jade you are made of wood" which describes how I see the 9th Doctor in this series. At 11:31 we get some more major dialogue and its stiffly delivered and he clearly does not care. The 9th Doctor can't sell any of the time war stuff because the way he says it is like he is reading an audio book. Its not being stoic because the other doctors could be stoic, but he is just uncomfortable in this role. 13:36 "I'm sorry" wow really engaging this makes him the best Doctor. He then goes its all my fault, Rose says "no". Then he starts inconsistent with his prior characterization and how he is characterized in Dalek (and E12/E13) and acts like Donna Noble saying "I am going to die in a dugeon..., in Cardiff (laugh its funny, right?)". The 9th Doctor acts more like the companion and Rose more like the Doctor in many scenes in the series.
The best story of Series 1, Dalek has the 9th Doctor act like a completely character than he does in the rest of the show, and if that episode did not exist he would lose lots of the praise he received. Can anyone describe to me the character of the 9th Doctor? In Rose (Ep.1) he goes from mysterious stoic guy to make mum jokes to crying about the time war. He goes from slapstick comedy that makes Delta and the Bannerman seem solemn to yelling about "muh hole' world's gone". The 9th Doctor is not a character he is a plot device who has a catch phrase.
At least with the 10th Doctor from the various first episode he has a character, its unique, he carries and acts in an certain way. Its relatively consistent throughout the series (the no 2nd chances bit is dropped along with some other parts from series 2, but I can still define the 10th Doctor). You can replace the 9th Doctor in nearly all of his episodes with another character and it would change very little to how he acts.
Series 1 used to be quite tolerable for me, but it has aged poorly and I find it harder and harder to sit through it. It doesn't help that the episodes look like they've been put through a vaseline filter. This eventually goes away in Series 3 which looks somewhat decent at least compared to the previous two series. Early to Mid 2000s TV looks quite ugly and rough to me. |
|
|
|
Post by Ludders II on Feb 29, 2024 15:30:21 GMT
I have problems with Eccleston, mainly due to his unsuitability to the role, and his inability to appear very Doctor-ish. But at least he can do anger, so those few scenes when the Doctor is angry, are for me, very convincing.
But Tennant, whilst on the face of it is more Doctor-ish, has never even for the slightest moment, managed to be convincing in any aspect of the role whatsoever.
So on that basis, I'm voting for Eccleston, because at least he has a few moments, whereas Tennant has none as far as I'm concerned. None whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ludders II on Feb 29, 2024 15:39:51 GMT
Just to add that I think Tennant's best work in NuWho is when he's playing John Smith in Human Nature. But the minute the character becomes the Doctor again,it's like flipping a switch. It goes from mediocre to utter wank in a split second.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ludders II on Feb 29, 2024 16:00:36 GMT
Some recent thoughts on 'Dalek', which I watched again about a month ago, in a bid to watch all NuWho Dalek stories. But alas, I never got further than Dalek. Lol
"Watched 'Dalek'. First of a look at all the NuWho Dalek episodes.
In the past I always rated this quite highly, but with some pretty big reservations.
Tonight I was more focussed on Eccleston himself in relation to his acting abilities and how well he plays the character of the Doctor.
The short answer is that he's very UN-Doctorish, and yet there are aspects to his portrayal that I really like. But how much of is Eccleston acting or Eccleston playing to type?
It's ironic that the Eccleston scenes I enjoy the most are the ones where many detractors have said, Oh he's just playing the 'northern hardman' again. But for my money it IS something he does well. He projects such fire and passion that I've always found him totally convincing in such scenes. In a sense, he's another actor playing himself, because the conviction in his performance seems to come from a fire inside him.
But is he playing the Doctor? I'm not so sure. The only scene I can think of from Classic Who that resembles Eccleston in any way, is when the Doctor loses his temper with the Captain in The Pirate Planet. The WHAT'S IT FOR?!' speech.
Nevertheless, I do enjoy those scenes in 'Dalek'. The other UN-Doctorish thing is Eccleston's appearance. The leather jacket and short hair is just so ordinary. I've heard the argument about him just blending in, but I can't totally run with the idea that the Doctor would wear such everyday stuff, and whilst I can't quite picture Chris in a McGann wig, I can't displace the feeling that something better could've been achieved at least regarding the clothing if not the hair.
Also, I realise that the actor is having to contend with some terrible Davies lines, but he doesn't convince at all in the sorrowful scene alluding to the Time War. I wasn't..... I couldn't.... Oh Rose..... Sorry Chris that was as flat as a pancake.
On to the story... I not going full deep analysis, but obviously Shearman's premise of a lone, damaged, 'last' Dalek is a solid foundation for the story, and most aspects are achieved and realised well.
Aside from occasionally wishing for a bit of old style RP, on lines like 'Wot ya gunna do t'me?', I do like the scene where Doctor is trapped in there with it. Also, the Dalek tricking Rose into touching it is harking back to the '60s Daleks at their most manipulative. Once the Dalek is out that's when it comes into own with the 'just one Dalek' killing spree, which is good stuff.
I've never liked the emo ending, but at least it makes sense in that the Dalek in absorbing Rose's DNA is suffering from a touch of the human factor, and I did like the idea that the Dalek sees it as a sickness and would prefer to self-destruct.
The bad stuff? Well, any and all scenes with Adam. Aside from Gold's nauseating 'romantic' muzak, the actor is obviously just a bit of fluff who got the gig for being 'a bit pretty' (allegedly) 😉 Even his best line mocking the Dalek a the base of the staircase was very flatly delivered. Terrible. He's shit. f*ck off back to Coronation Street, I said at the time.
The aforementioned c*ntposer Murray Gold also largely ruins the episode, with the exception of some low, ominous notes suitably adding to the sense of foreboding when the Dalek is working its way round the base. Otherwise though, his oft regurgitated sub-Omen shite is highly annoying and way too loud.
Those corny Davies lines. 'What use is emotion if you will not save the one you love'. Shut it Russell. Yes the Doctor quite naturally doesn't want to see Rose get killed, but you don't need gratuitously mention the 'L' word, you unsubtle c*nt.
Also, the Doctor mocking the Dalek's distress signal. No doubt Rusty was responsible for that shite too.
There are other examples, but point made.
And for what it's worth I think Billie Piper was OK on the whole, considering the character was conceived from the pen of a self-confessed soap opera fan.
I didn't mind Rose in the Eccleston season so much, It's when the doe eyed mockney Churchill the dog turns up that she gets really unlikeable.
All in all, I could picture this episode as more of a Dr Who spin-off. I feel i could largely enjoy Eccleston here if he wasn't playing the Doctor. That's the main problem, I struggle to feel like I'm watching the Doctor. But I feel like if this ep could somehow be reconceived as a self-contained spin-off episode, and the dialogue was written by someone other than RTD, and someone other than Murray Gold did the music, and didn't have Adam in it, then yeah, it could've been really good." 😆
|
|
|
|
Post by Cherry Pepsi Maxil on Feb 29, 2024 16:30:28 GMT
Some recent thoughts on 'Dalek', which I watched again about a month ago, in a bid to watch all NuWho Dalek stories. But alas, I never got further than Dalek. Lol "Watched 'Dalek'. First of a look at all the NuWho Dalek episodes. In the past I always rated this quite highly, but with some pretty big reservations. Tonight I was more focussed on Eccleston himself in relation to his acting abilities and how well he plays the character of the Doctor. The short answer is that he's very UN-Doctorish, and yet there are aspects to his portrayal that I really like. But how much of is Eccleston acting or Eccleston playing to type? It's ironic that the Eccleston scenes I enjoy the most are the ones where many detractors have said, Oh he's just playing the 'northern hardman' again. But for my money it IS something he does well. He projects such fire and passion that I've always found him totally convincing in such scenes. In a sense, he's another actor playing himself, because the conviction in his performance seems to come from a fire inside him. But is he playing the Doctor? I'm not so sure. The only scene I can think of from Classic Who that resembles Eccleston in any way, is when the Doctor loses his temper with the Captain in The Pirate Planet. The WHAT'S IT FOR?!' speech. Nevertheless, I do enjoy those scenes in 'Dalek'. The other UN-Doctorish thing is Eccleston's appearance. The leather jacket and short hair is just so ordinary. I've heard the argument about him just blending in, but I can't totally run with the idea that the Doctor would wear such everyday stuff, and whilst I can't quite picture Chris in a McGann wig, I can't displace the feeling that something better could've been achieved at least regarding the clothing if not the hair. Also, I realise that the actor is having to contend with some terrible Davies lines, but he doesn't convince at all in the sorrowful scene alluding to the Time War. I wasn't..... I couldn't.... Oh Rose..... Sorry Chris that was as flat as a pancake. On to the story... I not going full deep analysis, but obviously Shearman's premise of a lone, damaged, 'last' Dalek is a solid foundation for the story, and most aspects are achieved and realised well. Aside from occasionally wishing for a bit of old style RP, on lines like 'Wot ya gunna do t'me?', I do like the scene where Doctor is trapped in there with it. Also, the Dalek tricking Rose into touching it is harking back to the '60s Daleks at their most manipulative. Once the Dalek is out that's when it comes into own with the 'just one Dalek' killing spree, which is good stuff. I've never liked the emo ending, but at least it makes sense in that the Dalek in absorbing Rose's DNA is suffering from a touch of the human factor, and I did like the idea that the Dalek sees it as a sickness and would prefer to self-destruct. The bad stuff? Well, any and all scenes with Adam. Aside from Gold's nauseating 'romantic' muzak, the actor is obviously just a bit of fluff who got the gig for being 'a bit pretty' (allegedly) 😉 Even his best line mocking the Dalek a the base of the staircase was very flatly delivered. Terrible. He's shit. f*ck off back to Coronation Street, I said at the time. The aforementioned c*ntposer Murray Gold also largely ruins the episode, with the exception of some low, ominous notes suitably adding to the sense of foreboding when the Dalek is working its way round the base. Otherwise though, his oft regurgitated sub-Omen shite is highly annoying and way too loud. Those corny Davies lines. 'What use is emotion if you will not save the one you love'. Shut it Russell. Yes the Doctor quite naturally doesn't want to see Rose get killed, but you don't need gratuitously mention the 'L' word, you unsubtle c*nt. Also, the Doctor mocking the Dalek's distress signal. No doubt Rusty was responsible for that shite too. There are other examples, but point made. And for what it's worth I think Billie Piper was OK on the whole, considering the character was conceived from the pen of a self-confessed soap opera fan. I didn't mind Rose in the Eccleston season so much, It's when the doe eyed mockney Churchill the dog turns up that she gets really unlikeable. All in all, I could picture this episode as more of a Dr Who spin-off. I feel i could largely enjoy Eccleston here if he wasn't playing the Doctor. That's the main problem, I struggle to feel like I'm watching the Doctor. But I feel like if this ep could somehow be reconceived as a self-contained spin-off episode, and the dialogue was written by someone other than RTD, and someone other than Murray Gold did the music, and didn't have Adam in it, then yeah, it could've been really good." 😆 The only modern Dalek stories I really enjoy are Bad Wolf/Parting of the Ways and the Daleks in Manhattan two parter. Dalek has always left me cold and Journey's Bellend is a horribly smug affair. |
|
|
|
Post by Cherry Pepsi Maxil on Feb 29, 2024 16:31:59 GMT
Eve of the Daleks wasn't too bad, actually. A rare occasion when a Chibnall outing wasn't unwatchable tripe.
|
|
|
|
Post by ClockworkOcean on Feb 29, 2024 16:33:41 GMT
All in all, I could picture this episode as more of a Dr Who spin-off. I feel i could largely enjoy Eccleston here if he wasn't playing the Doctor. Agreed. Eccleston is a very respectable dramatic actor, he just wasn't right for the Doctor. If he'd been portraying an ex-UNIT officer traumatised by a previous encounter with the Daleks, introduced as a recurring character in a faithful continuation of the classic show and given his own spinoff, I could easily get behind the performance he gives in this episode. |
|
|
|
Post by Ludders II on Feb 29, 2024 16:39:12 GMT
Some recent thoughts on 'Dalek', which I watched again about a month ago, in a bid to watch all NuWho Dalek stories. But alas, I never got further than Dalek. Lol "Watched 'Dalek'. First of a look at all the NuWho Dalek episodes. In the past I always rated this quite highly, but with some pretty big reservations. Tonight I was more focussed on Eccleston himself in relation to his acting abilities and how well he plays the character of the Doctor. The short answer is that he's very UN-Doctorish, and yet there are aspects to his portrayal that I really like. But how much of is Eccleston acting or Eccleston playing to type? It's ironic that the Eccleston scenes I enjoy the most are the ones where many detractors have said, Oh he's just playing the 'northern hardman' again. But for my money it IS something he does well. He projects such fire and passion that I've always found him totally convincing in such scenes. In a sense, he's another actor playing himself, because the conviction in his performance seems to come from a fire inside him. But is he playing the Doctor? I'm not so sure. The only scene I can think of from Classic Who that resembles Eccleston in any way, is when the Doctor loses his temper with the Captain in The Pirate Planet. The WHAT'S IT FOR?!' speech. Nevertheless, I do enjoy those scenes in 'Dalek'. The other UN-Doctorish thing is Eccleston's appearance. The leather jacket and short hair is just so ordinary. I've heard the argument about him just blending in, but I can't totally run with the idea that the Doctor would wear such everyday stuff, and whilst I can't quite picture Chris in a McGann wig, I can't displace the feeling that something better could've been achieved at least regarding the clothing if not the hair. Also, I realise that the actor is having to contend with some terrible Davies lines, but he doesn't convince at all in the sorrowful scene alluding to the Time War. I wasn't..... I couldn't.... Oh Rose..... Sorry Chris that was as flat as a pancake. On to the story... I not going full deep analysis, but obviously Shearman's premise of a lone, damaged, 'last' Dalek is a solid foundation for the story, and most aspects are achieved and realised well. Aside from occasionally wishing for a bit of old style RP, on lines like 'Wot ya gunna do t'me?', I do like the scene where Doctor is trapped in there with it. Also, the Dalek tricking Rose into touching it is harking back to the '60s Daleks at their most manipulative. Once the Dalek is out that's when it comes into own with the 'just one Dalek' killing spree, which is good stuff. I've never liked the emo ending, but at least it makes sense in that the Dalek in absorbing Rose's DNA is suffering from a touch of the human factor, and I did like the idea that the Dalek sees it as a sickness and would prefer to self-destruct. The bad stuff? Well, any and all scenes with Adam. Aside from Gold's nauseating 'romantic' muzak, the actor is obviously just a bit of fluff who got the gig for being 'a bit pretty' (allegedly) 😉 Even his best line mocking the Dalek a the base of the staircase was very flatly delivered. Terrible. He's shit. f*ck off back to Coronation Street, I said at the time. The aforementioned c*ntposer Murray Gold also largely ruins the episode, with the exception of some low, ominous notes suitably adding to the sense of foreboding when the Dalek is working its way round the base. Otherwise though, his oft regurgitated sub-Omen shite is highly annoying and way too loud. Those corny Davies lines. 'What use is emotion if you will not save the one you love'. Shut it Russell. Yes the Doctor quite naturally doesn't want to see Rose get killed, but you don't need gratuitously mention the 'L' word, you unsubtle c*nt. Also, the Doctor mocking the Dalek's distress signal. No doubt Rusty was responsible for that shite too. There are other examples, but point made. And for what it's worth I think Billie Piper was OK on the whole, considering the character was conceived from the pen of a self-confessed soap opera fan. I didn't mind Rose in the Eccleston season so much, It's when the doe eyed mockney Churchill the dog turns up that she gets really unlikeable. All in all, I could picture this episode as more of a Dr Who spin-off. I feel i could largely enjoy Eccleston here if he wasn't playing the Doctor. That's the main problem, I struggle to feel like I'm watching the Doctor. But I feel like if this ep could somehow be reconceived as a self-contained spin-off episode, and the dialogue was written by someone other than RTD, and someone other than Murray Gold did the music, and didn't have Adam in it, then yeah, it could've been really good." 😆 The only modern Dalek stories I really enjoy are Bad Wolf/Parting of the Ways and the Daleks in Manhattan two parter. Dalek has always left me cold and Journey's Bellend is a horribly smug affair. I liked a lot of things about Bad Wolf/Parting of the Ways, admittedly mainly pertaining to the Daleks, but as ever with NuWho, there's always a lot of detracting shite aspects that spoil it. I think Manhattan was a very comic strip type of episode so it gets away with a lot of that basis. But yeah, Stolen Earth was pants. As were the Moffat Dalek stories. |
|
|
|
Post by Ludders II on Feb 29, 2024 16:42:00 GMT
Eve of the Daleks wasn't too bad, actually. A rare occasion when a Chibnall outing wasn't unwatchable tripe. I've seen it, but I get the Jodie Dalek stories mixed up with each other, as I've never rewatched them. |
|
|
|
Post by Ludders II on Feb 29, 2024 16:43:37 GMT
All in all, I could picture this episode as more of a Dr Who spin-off. I feel i could largely enjoy Eccleston here if he wasn't playing the Doctor. Agreed. Eccleston is a very respectable dramatic actor, he just wasn't right for the Doctor. If he'd been portraying an ex-UNIT officer traumatised by a previous encounter with the Daleks, introduced as a recurring character in a faithful continuation of the classic show and given his own spinoff, I could easily get behind the performance he gives in this episode. That's exactly it. 👍 |
|
|
|
Post by Bernard Marx on Feb 29, 2024 17:05:02 GMT
Agreed. Eccleston is a very respectable dramatic actor, he just wasn't right for the Doctor. To Eccleston's credit, I found his performance in Our Friends in the North (which I first saw two years ago) infinitely more committed and impressive than anything Tennant has ever done. |
|
|
|
Post by Ludders II on Feb 29, 2024 17:18:21 GMT
Agreed. Eccleston is a very respectable dramatic actor, he just wasn't right for the Doctor. To Eccleston's credit, I found his performance in Our Friends in the North (which I first saw two years ago) infinitely more committed and impressive than anything Tennant has ever done. Precisely. And yet he gets flak for it, in the sense that people think he can only do the 'northern hardman' thing. But his role in OFITN wasn't so one-dimensional. I think people get the idea that because Chris is quite an upfront, some might say assertive character, who's proud of his northern, working class roots; said people think that's all he can "do". |
|
|
|
Post by Bernard Marx on Feb 29, 2024 17:23:17 GMT
To Eccleston's credit, I found his performance in Our Friends in the North (which I first saw two years ago) infinitely more committed and impressive than anything Tennant has ever done. Precisely. And yet he gets flak for it, in the sense that people think he can only do the 'northern hardman' thing. But his role in OFITN wasn't so one-dimensional. I think people get the idea that because Chris is quite an upfront, some might say assertive character, who's proud of his northern, working class roots; said people think that's all he can "do". Nicky Hutchinson is barely the same person in 1970 (a fully committed member of the Trotskyist movement) as he was in 1964 (an optimistic young Labour supporter with leftist pretensions and self-important inclinations). And he's hardly the same person in 1996 (a disaffected journalist guilty of alienating all around him) as he is at any other stage in the series. He's effectively playing several different characters in one- it takes a lot of talent to nail such developments in a performance. I used to assume he was lacking in versatility too, but I wasn't familiar with his genuine successes at the time. |
|
