Site Menu

July 16th, 2017 1,081 comments

Jodie Whittaker Announced As The 13th Doctor

Please note ALL comments are on moderation and it may take a while before they are put through.



Please note ALL comments are on moderation and it may take a while before they are put through.




Please note ALL comments are on moderation and it may take a while before they are put through.


1,081 comments

  • The Moffat Paradox

    September 20th, 2017 - 7:33pm

    A new Lara Croft Tomb Raider movie out in 2018.
    No unlike“ modern” Who commitment to diversity so that a male could be considered for the role ?

    Surely not.

    Reply
  • Anonymous

    September 5th, 2017 - 8:00pm

    No just me his more around 4000. He lost count near his 8th body and started count again.

    Reply
    • Doctor Stu

      September 5th, 2017 - 8:11pm

      The age is irrelevant anyway it was just to assist my point on the fact that a historical character like queen Elizabeth is not going to suddenly change gender,

  • GumBoocho

    September 5th, 2017 - 6:24am

    So the next time the BBC does a movie on Queen Elizabeth, I suppose the role will be played by a man — likewise Henry VIII by a woman.

    Reply
    • Doctor Stu

      September 5th, 2017 - 12:31pm

      Queen Elizabeth is not a 2,000 year old Alien with a different biological make up and regenerative abilities though and I don’t remember Henry VIII being one either so…

    • Anonymous

      September 5th, 2017 - 5:15pm

      The Doctor is not 2000 years old.

    • Tony

      September 5th, 2017 - 7:13pm

      quite right, he’s older that that

    • Doctor Stu

      September 5th, 2017 - 7:32pm

      Around about 2000 anyway

  • Doctor Why???

    September 2nd, 2017 - 12:24pm

    I’ve tried several times on several sites (including this one) to express honestly held opinions on this matter – always polite, always (I hope) well thought-out and succinct and never rude or offensive. The funny thing is, they NEVER get posted… maybe they’re just too ‘controversial’ because they point out certain facts (yes, facts – not opinions) that don’t suit some people’s view. What a sad world we now live in.

    I wonder if this will get posted? Sadly, I have no idea!

    Reply
    • booboo

      September 2nd, 2017 - 4:52pm

      I have found your comments, they went straight into spam so that’s probably happening on other sites to as to why they dont get posted

    • Doctor Why???

      September 2nd, 2017 - 8:48pm

      Oh! Okay… I didn’t realise that’s how it worked; thanks for letting me know.

      I must admit, I was surprised when they didn’t appear because, having read many of the comments on here, I had concluded that it was a well moderated site and showed a good mixture of opinions – unlike many other sites I’ve visited lately. It’s great to finally find a place where people at least respect and listen to others’ opinions regardless of whether or not they agree.

      I’m glad to discover that my original opinion about comments on this site was correct and I’m sorry to have suggested otherwise. Keep up the great work!

  • Doctor Why???

    September 1st, 2017 - 8:35pm

    If it ain’t broke… break it!

    Reply
    • nygel Harrot

      September 4th, 2017 - 9:21pm

      I just had to respond to your marvellous comments Doctor Why???
      Not just this one but the lovely purple eiderdown memories. Its great to know that we are not alone in our love for the program of old and will not be hoodwinked by ‘flash flash-no plot’ story lines. Thank you for leaving them.

  • Ismael

    August 17th, 2017 - 4:57pm

    Does anyone remember the Doctor Who comic relief sketch? It’s not really the same Doctor Who, but that sketch had the first female Doctor…

    Reply
    • Lorraine

      August 17th, 2017 - 10:59pm

      Yes because it was comic relief so outrageous stupid things could happen. Nevertheless we must accept the very weird and strangely pointless direction the writers have taken and perhaps it will work. I just don’t see why it was necessary to do this apart from egotistical pandering to the minority. Perhaps the doctor will be from Earth and not Gallifray as it seems nothing is sacred and intact. For the record I am female and proud of this. I just want my doctor who to be the bloke(s) I have admired since 1963 when I was 6. Of course as Peter Davison says we might be dinosaurs but we might be coming to you in a spaceship. I will be the assistant of course!

    • Pats86

      August 18th, 2017 - 7:51am

      Well said Lorraine, both my wife and daughter do not want a female Doctor either.

  • The Moffat Paradox

    August 16th, 2017 - 11:36am

    Just announced Daniel Craig is returning as 007 so no Jane Bond. as a spectre (pun intended).At least with some franchises unlike “modern” Who some things remain reliably constant.

    Reply
    • 12th Doctor Fan

      August 18th, 2017 - 12:10am

      Thank god, I’d never watch a female bond, still not convinced female doctor but I’ll give her a chance.

    • Pats86

      August 18th, 2017 - 7:58am

      I would say it would never happen, Band as a female! But in this insane world it wouldn’t suprise me although I would draw the line at that.
      Barbra Broccoli would never let Bond be ruined, she is too emotionally intelligent for that unlike some people I could mention?

    • Doctor Stu

      August 20th, 2017 - 11:17am

      007 is a code name so female bond could happen, the Doctor is an alien with two hearts who’s been a female for once out of 13 lives it’s not that big a deal. People think some sort of big evil cloud is going to drop over their favorite programs and start switching genders all over the place. Can’t understand why women wouldn’t be happy for more equal representation of women on TV, it’s literally 13 episodes out of nearly 900 where there’s going to be a woman in charge.

    • The Moffat Paradox

      August 20th, 2017 - 9:41pm

      007 is the code name from the original Fleming novels permanently associated in popular culture) with a Commander James Bond. Of course there could be a female 00 (One’s seen in “The World Is Not Enough”) but that wouldn’t be the creation of Ian Fleming people are interested in seeing. Just like an in universe contrived female Doctor is not what many people who will sustain an audience can be taken for granted as being continued to be interested in seeing.

      Besides a female James Bond of sorts has already been done. Sidney Bristow in “Alias” played by Jennifer Garner

  • Doctor Stu

    August 7th, 2017 - 1:16pm

    Jodie Whitaker is on Lorraine tomorrow morning for her first tv interview since the announcement if anyone’s interested (already posted but I thought it would make more sense it post it in this section)

    Reply
    • R1ch1e

      August 7th, 2017 - 2:56pm

      Thanks mate. I’ll set that to record!

  • nygel Harrot

    August 4th, 2017 - 10:04pm

    Its a funny thing.. people keep saying dr.who is all about change… when it’s change that’s killed it. Look back at the very first episode (well 1 and 2).. The wonderful Barbara Wright,(a mature woman who’s very likeable) ian ( a mature man … who’s very likeable) the marvellous Tardis were the Dr looks like he’s actually working and flying it. The excitement of travel. The mystery of the Dr. Its all there…. the more they’ve gone away from this formula the worse it’s got.
    All the best dr.who’s have been the same formula…. Monster, invasion, defeat.
    Just think the new who has been on the air for 12 years now… When the original had been on that time we’d had some CLASSIC really CLASSIC stories, monsters, companions … cant say that for this last 12 years 🙁
    If this last seven years had been a brand new series with no link to the past… it would have been taken off the air… What makes Dr.Who great is the ORIGINAL series.

    Reply
    • Pats86

      August 5th, 2017 - 7:20am

      Indeed the classic series had many CLASSIC stories, Nuwho has had some classic stories but nothing that can touch the original classics.

    • nygel Harrot

      August 5th, 2017 - 8:51am

      Good morning Pats86, thank you for replying to my comment…I heart felt replied to some of your contributions before i left this one of my own . Hope you’ve seen them. 🙂

    • Pats86

      August 5th, 2017 - 2:35pm

      Indeed I have, and you will have noticed that others are of the same opinion as ourselves keep voicing your feelings and don’t let anyone try to stop you, Moffat, Chibnall and the BBC would like nothing more!

    • Adam

      August 5th, 2017 - 11:32pm

      Beautifully put nygel harrot….sadly the series has become a parody of it’s once great self under Moffat’s awful tenure!..and now nothing more but ‘Doctor who’ in name only under the BBC and Chibnall’s ‘alternate universe TIME LADY PC agenda driven’ rendition of a once great character….

    • The Moffat Paradox

      August 6th, 2017 - 2:12am

      I’m actually between two stools here.The classic series set the bar but the modern series has at its best been event TV. Probably Inevitably with a bigger budget and also a more significant international audience they would go for self contained or linked 45 minute episodes and ones with story arcs over a whole series.

      Where there has been a let down is in the writing with story arcs that become anti climaxes,or become too labyrinthine ( particularly when Moffat took over in the Matt Smith era) with resort to the now more notorious plot device of ” Timey Whimey” and the seeming in particular Moffat presumption that we just accept things as a given without a more logical explanation ;e.g. how Missy has appeared in “Extremis” for judgement without any background of how she escaped or was let go from Skaro without just being hexterminated by the Daleks at end of the The Witch’s Familiar”.

      Which makes me wonder if this isn’t being plotting lazy if it’s because Moffat was as head writer a practioner of post modernism in his writing which certainly isn’t always jto my taste and not something he can get away with so easily when it’s Sherlock.And then of course there’s the implicit politicisiation of the modern series with pandering to political correctness and it’s ultimate expression with in universe tinkering to change the gender of the central character.which has grown from irksome to alienating.

      Yet I think the really annoying and maddening thing about Moffat was that he can,as with the Weeping Angels have some GOOD IDEAS! Which is why I think he is a bit of a paradox and call myself here The Moffat Paradox.

    • The Outcast

      August 6th, 2017 - 8:16am

      NuWho could easily be better. A start would be getting rid of that Doctor romance trash. He’s an alien, not some cosmic boyfriend. The next would be realising that the Doctor’s backstory is better left alone. How many times has Moffat interfered in the Doctor’s past? Remember Name of the Doctor’s TARDIS scene? Or the Listen scene? Or the implication he only left Gallifrey cause he was scared of some ________ Hybrid prophesy?

      I reckon the gender change can work, but I’m worried we’ll end up with a Doctor who makes the biggest deal out of becoming a female and sprouts lines like “why didn’t I become a female earlier, I’ve so much less ego” or ____ like that.

      ______ means whatever rude word you want.

    • T.A

      August 6th, 2017 - 2:10pm

      I like NuWho more in the RTD era. I also think Moffat wrote better stories in the RTD era.

    • Lorraine

      August 9th, 2017 - 9:00am

      Well I have watched Jodie in her new series yesterday and I am sorry to say I am not that impressed. It must be hoped that she can bring some gravitas to Doctor Who but I am failing to see that at the moment. She just lacks screen presence to me and her voice seems quite unremarkable but perhaps I am missing something. Certainly the poor girl has her work cut out with us moaning lot. I really hope I am proved wrong but everything just seems a bit broken at the moment. I am no longer angry just sad. Very.

    • The Moffat Paradox

      August 10th, 2017 - 6:03pm

      That still feels a bit like being in another SCI-FI franchise like Star Trek’s parallel universe.

  • Doctor Stu

    August 2nd, 2017 - 12:19pm

    So apparently series 11 will be starting in the Autumn 2018, which puts it right up against X Factor regardless of whether it’s staying on a Saturday or moving to a Sunday which has been speculated because the live shows will also cover both days. I’m not against a female doctor as everyone knows but with all this backlash and the possibility of viewers turning off in their droves is it really worth pitting Doctor Who against Simon Cowells giant money making machine

    Reply
    • booboo

      August 2nd, 2017 - 1:17pm

      unless of course they are going to turn it back into the “family show” to air around 6.00pm

    • Prof Horner

      August 2nd, 2017 - 7:05pm

      Would putting it on at 6.00 pm be such a bad think?

    • booboo

      August 2nd, 2017 - 7:11pm

      depends on the audience its aimed at, but then things aren’t what they were

      In the old days it used to be Doctor Who, Bath, bedtime story then sleep by 7.00

    • Doctor Stu

      August 4th, 2017 - 12:21pm

      Doctor Who doesn’t know what it wants to be at the moment, back with RTD it was simple, Doctor Who was for the family, SJA was for the kids and Torchwood was for the adults. With Moffat series 5 and series 6 part 1 kind of followed this formula, then series 6 part 2 and definetly series 7 got a bit goofy and dumbed down and then series 8 and 9 were all over the place with series 10 trying again to be for the whole family. Chibnall needs to come in and set his tone from the outset and continue it for the duration that he’s in charge

    • booboo

      August 4th, 2017 - 12:32pm

      Agreed

      It may also be the right time to look at another CBBC spin off, plenty they could do there

      Does concern me that Class, aimed at young adults and those calling for wide representation of today’s society was an outright disaster both here and the states.

    • The Outcast

      August 4th, 2017 - 12:53pm

      I think Class failed because:
      A) it didn’t have a good connection to the show (its set at that one school that appeared a couple of times and some Doctor Who things appear for about 5 minutes, wow, what a connection, unlike Torchwood or the Sarah Jane Adventures, where the main characters in the main show and had Doctor Who villains like Slitheen and Sontarans).
      B) it wasn’t very good (Most people I’ve seen who have watched the entire thing dislike it)
      C) it wasn’t well advertised and was put in the worst slot.

      I think in future, if more spin offs are made they need to be well advertised, have characters we already know and have more of a connection to the show.

    • booboo

      August 4th, 2017 - 1:21pm

      It was very heavily promoted on social media both here and the USA, the way most people in that age group get there info these days and people had to watch it to see if they liked it but they just weren’t watching in the first place.

      Because of its very adult content the connection had to be kept low key one would imagine.

      The viewing figures were terrible even taking everything into account.

      (should say i enjoyed most of it but it get a bit repetitive towards the end)

    • The Moffat Paradox

      August 14th, 2017 - 12:38pm

      Unless thay can as with Star Trek Next Generation and crossover series like Deep Space Nine and Voyager come up with good and well thought series that can blossom on their own Doctor Who offfshoots have been more miss than hit and tried to be either too juvenile or too adult.

      You would maybe also have to have characters taking on Daleks/Cybermen et all on their own without a gender unpredictable Gallifreyan to save the day to establish more viewer credibility.If that since 16th July hasn’t already been lost.

  • The Moffat Paradox

    August 1st, 2017 - 12:45am

    Somebody on 16th July uploaded an image and a quote from Dr Ian Malcom in Jurassic Park on the Doctor Who Facebook page which in I and others view of the decision is very apt:

    “They were so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.”

    Reply
    • Lorraine

      August 1st, 2017 - 11:39pm

      Perfect

  • RICHARD HILL

    July 30th, 2017 - 2:18pm

    Give the poor women a chance – People slated Matt Smith for being too young before he even started and look how well he did – Only saw the first series of Broadchurch and yes although she played that part well, in this no she is not the Doctor – But from the trailer showing us she is the new Doctor she looks the part. Good luck to her

    Reply
    • R1ch1e

      July 30th, 2017 - 4:04pm

      Well said Richard Hill!

    • Doctor Stu

      July 31st, 2017 - 9:03pm

      It’s all about the costume and the Doctor look for me, cringed when I saw matts first promo picture for the Doctor, i thought ok he’s an attractive young male but what else he looks nothing like the doctor but then as soon as the promos were released with him in his Doctor Who costume my opinion completely changed

    • Lorraine

      August 1st, 2017 - 11:36pm

      We are puppets of the writers whose ego and opinions seem not to matter to those who love the programme dearly. They will always try to be bigger than the last guy and the BBC take heed. Whatever happens I really hope there is no cancellation hence going forward hope and pray that Jodie works out

  • R1ch1e

    July 29th, 2017 - 2:09pm

    Lol Different program guys.! I can recommend a film on Prime called Adult Life Skills to check her acting out. Also Venus with Peter O’Toole.

    Reply
    • R1ch1e

      July 29th, 2017 - 2:18pm

      Sorry this was supposed to be a comment to Dalek Eye Stalk

  • Pats86

    July 29th, 2017 - 1:33pm

    Silvester McCoy has said he was not keen on the idea of a female Doctor but now he has got his head around it he is quite excited by the idea, perhaps us that are also not keen on the idea need to get our heads around it also.

    Reply
    • Pats86

      July 29th, 2017 - 1:39pm

      If the regeneration can be explained better than “Time Lords can change gender and that’s it” would be helpful because the fact that he never has been female before despite going through a whole set of regenerations when gender is supposedly fluid on Gallifrey, it doesn’t sit well with many fans and I’m sure a good explanation will help us make peace with the decision?

    • Dalek Eye Stalk

      July 29th, 2017 - 3:17pm

      The first cycle of regenerations for likely any timelord is set at either male for all 13 incarnations, or female for all 13 incarnations. If the timelords decide to gift a new cycle of regenerations, then you could end up male or female.

    • Anonymous

      July 29th, 2017 - 5:11pm

      That can’t be true because in hell bent the general was a male and then changed into a female and he was on his 10 regen.

    • Dalek Eye Stalk

      July 29th, 2017 - 6:01pm

      Who’s not to say that’s also his second cycle of regenerations…

    • T.A

      July 29th, 2017 - 7:44pm

      Peter is the first doctor of the second cycle so that theroy would not make sense.

    • T.A

      July 29th, 2017 - 7:45pm

      Also in hell bent she said it was the first time she was a male.

    • Dalek Eye Stalk

      July 31st, 2017 - 10:59pm

      What we have to consider is that Time Lords like Earthlings have progressed over a great period of time, of that I’m sure we can all agree. The First Doctor left Gallifrey a long long time ago. Time Lords back then couldn’t change gender. Born male, your future 12 regenerations would be male. Born female, your future 12 regenerations would also be female. Go further into the future and Time Lords have adapted regenerations so that a Time Lord is now able to be either male, female or even maybe something else! It’s the evolution of regeneration. The General is likely born a lot lot later than the 1st Doctor, so when the General was born a she, it was at a later point of Time Lord society and evolution. A time when their first regenerations were already set to be a random he or she anyway. Plus I’m sure the General lost several incarnations in quick succession in battle, namely the Time War. Time Lord gender fluidity is a fairly recent alteration to regenerative d.n.a., as the recent few series has shoehorned and spoon fed into folklore by Mr Moffat.

    • The Outcast

      August 1st, 2017 - 10:00am

      What about the explanation from “The Exile”, which says the only way to change gender is to commit suicide or be executed by the Timelords?

    • T.A

      August 1st, 2017 - 11:16am

      What the inquisitor (who was female from) trial of a time lord.

  • Dalek Eye Stalk

    July 28th, 2017 - 9:36pm

    I like the fact in the upcoming BBC 1 trailer for ‘Trust Me’, Jodie Whttaker says “I’m not a real Doctor”. Well, that should satisfy some Doctor Who fans. 🙂

    Reply
    • pats86

      July 29th, 2017 - 8:38am

      Having never seen Jodie in anything before it will give me a chance to see her acting abilities at least.
      Now I have seen the trailer to “Trust Me” I kept hearing ” I’m not a real doctor ” then I think “can I trust her as The Doctor?” I doubt I’m on my own on this?

    • The Moffat Paradox

      July 29th, 2017 - 10:19am

      LOL. She also says “I’ve taken something that doesn’t really belong to me” which sums it up. How potentially very portentous..

    • Adam

      July 29th, 2017 - 1:28pm

      I’ve seen Ms Whittaker in Broadchurch and Attack the Block…Believe me she’s no Doctor..

    • Dalek Eye Stalk

      July 29th, 2017 - 6:00pm

      Whittaker certainly wouldn’t have been my first choice for a female Doctor. She doesn’t have the gravitas the role of the Doctor requires.

    • The Living Shadow

      July 29th, 2017 - 7:34pm

      I remember thinking that about David Tennant (That weird guy from Harry Potter) and Matt Smith (Who..?) when they were first cast, and now it’s hard for me to even imagine them not being the Doctor!

    • Whovastron

      August 4th, 2017 - 10:47am

      David Tennant was in Doctor Who before Harry Potter

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

By clicking submit you agree to our terms and conditions (below), we reserve the right to edit or delete inappropriate messages.

Comment rules

The Doctor Who site welcomes constuctive comments related to the news article in question. Links posted in comments may not be displayed. We reserve the right to delete or edit any post entirely at our discretion. If you leave unacceptable comments your IP address will be banned and reported

Click here to read full comments terms and conditions

Twitter

Facebook