Login

Username

Password



Not a rebel yet?
CLICK HERE to register.

Forgotten your password?
Request a new one from Orac HERE.

Current User Info

· Lurkers Lurking: 6

· Rebels Active: 1
trevor travis

· Total Rebels: 919
· Newest Rebel: Ritter_der_Tiefe

Login Help

If you are having problems logging in, please bear in mind that if you originally registered at the site before 8th January 2014 and you haven't re-registered since that date your old login details will no longer work. If this is the case, please re-register, preferably with your former username. If you are having trouble with the registration process itself, try looking HERE and HERE for help and advice. If you need further assistance, please do CONTACT us.

Current Poll

Who is your Favourite Guest Rebel?

Avalon - (Project Avalon)
Avalon - (Project Avalon)
18% [17 Votes]

Selma - (Horizon)
Selma - (Horizon)
5% [5 Votes]

Tyce - (Bounty)
Tyce - (Bounty)
15% [14 Votes]

Norm One - (Redemption)
Norm One - (Redemption)
2% [2 Votes]

Bek - (Shadow)
Bek - (Shadow)
6% [6 Votes]

Kasabi - (Pressure Point)
Kasabi - (Pressure Point)
19% [18 Votes]

Hal Mellanby - (Aftermath)
Hal Mellanby - (Aftermath)
15% [14 Votes]

Hunda - (Traitor)
Hunda - (Traitor)
5% [5 Votes]

Deva - (Blake)
Deva - (Blake)
9% [9 Votes]

Other
Other
6% [6 Votes]

Votes: 96
Login to vote.
Started: 09 July 2016

Polls Archive

Forum Activity

Newest Articles

B7 Images

+ Cookies +

The Horizon website uses cookies to allow user log-in and navigation. The site does not host advertising that requires the use of third-party cookies. Registering as a member of this site implies your consent to the use of cookies.

View Thread

 Print Thread
Doctor Who Is Dead
President Solvite
Psst I have got a 3rd generation copy of Warlord and a slightly dodgy blooper reel on VHS!!

By 'eck these youngsters don't know they've been born! Grin
 
http://nothingsforgotten.freeforums.net/
Coser
I'm glad that I have come back to the forum again to see this.

Although I have not been able to join in for quite a while, I am glad that we are discussing such topics with grace, intelligence, and information.

In respect to the last point [information], I will not be watching any further. I was not impressed by Mr. Capaldi's later episodes, so much so that I didn't watch any of his last season, not because of a dislike for the way he played the character, but a dislike for the scripts and the other things going on in the show. As a classic Whovian, I will not watch anything where gender is optional, so will not be watching the new season.

There are several points being made in this debate that I have to take exception to, and I will put forward my thoughts on those now.

1. Gender has been fluid since the 'revelation' of The Master/Missy situation.

No. It hasn't. Gender wasn't fluid until the remark of a Galifreyan guard(? possibly general or something like that) who regenerated into a woman's body and said how good it was to be female again. The Master/Missy situation is unique. The Master used all of his regenerations back during the 4th incarnation of the Doctor. He was able to absorb energy direct from the Eye of Harmony and has since been able to take over others bodies. [Deadly Assassin, Castrovalva] At the end of the period where he was played by John Simms, the ring he wore, possibly a receptacle for his 'mind' or a genetic memory device of some sort, was clearly picked up by a female hand. This is presumably the same female whose body he now inhabits as "Missy".

2. Gender has always been fluid.

No. Again, it hasn't. The Doctor has been through a full regeneration cycle, all of which were male. His second incarnation was given some choices as to the form he would next take, and all of them were male. There are "Time Lords" and "Time Ladies". Lady Romanadvoratrelundar, Romana for short, was a Time Lady. Her only onscreen regeneration, although unusual in that it was not forced, was one where she was able to 'try out' several bodies, and as far as I can tell/remember they were all female.

Now I realise that gender fluidity is a thing. The problem is that the internal logic of "Doctor Who" has not shown gender fluidity before and bringing it in now is unusual at the very least. Let's face it, "Finding Nemo" would have been a very different film had it been that Nemo's father set out to find Nemo, only to have turned into a female by the time the two fish actually were re-united.

I have nothing against any of the actors involved, I think this is just the last in a line of bad decisions by the production company and certain individuals within that organisation. I would also like to have seen more strong female characters in the show. Why, for example, could we not have had a number of episodes - say half a season - where we follow the antics of River Song with only a brief encounter with the Doctor in each episode. The other half season could have been the very same adventures from the perspective of the Doctor with brief points where we meet up with, or see, River song? This would have allowed us a brief glimpse into the Doctor's 'future' at the start of the season, returning to his 'present' at the middle, and then moving forward again following him.

I would also have appreciated the same sort of treatment where River is now replaced with Romana. Although this would have given up the 'crossing time streams ' effect of using River Song, it would have been possible to introduce a female character at least as strong as the Doctor himself. I think I would have preferred any of those to the return of the Rani. Any of the doctor's foes have to be defeated, and a foe that is defeated all the time loses their position as a foe and becomes a minor irritant. This means that all foes have to be used sparingly or they lose their threat, and doesn't give a strong woman a real chance at a long run.

A succession of female foes also wouldn't work in the long run, so far better a strong equal to the Doctor. However, I personally don't believe a female doctor will work and I prefer to keep my memories of "Doctor Who" as they were. I don't want the series to fail, and I know I may not be the audience they are looking for these days, so I will end by wishing "Nu-Who" all the best, and I hope they find a viable audience to carry it further into the 21st century.
"Ask ten different scientists about the environment, population control, genetics, and you'll get ten different answers, but there's one thing every scientist on the planet agrees on. Whether it happens in a hundred years or a thousand years or a million years, eventually our Sun will grow cold and go out. When that happens, it won't just take us. It'll take Marilyn Monroe, and Lao-Tzu, and Einstein, and Morobuto, and Buddy Holly, and Aristophanes…then all of this…all of this…was for nothing. Unless we go to the stars." Commander sinclair, Babylon 5.
 
steveothen
Coser wrote:

I'm glad that I have come back to the forum again to see this.

Although I have not been able to join in for quite a while, I am glad that we are discussing such topics with grace, intelligence, and information.

In respect to the last point [information], I will not be watching any further. I was not impressed by Mr. Capaldi's later episodes, so much so that I didn't watch any of his last season, not because of a dislike for the way he played the character, but a dislike for the scripts and the other things going on in the show. As a classic Whovian, I will not watch anything where gender is optional, so will not be watching the new season.

There are several points being made in this debate that I have to take exception to, and I will put forward my thoughts on those now.

1. Gender has been fluid since the 'revelation' of The Master/Missy situation.

No. It hasn't. Gender wasn't fluid until the remark of a Galifreyan guard(? possibly general or something like that) who regenerated into a woman's body and said how good it was to be female again. The Master/Missy situation is unique. The Master used all of his regenerations back during the 4th incarnation of the Doctor. He was able to absorb energy direct from the Eye of Harmony and has since been able to take over others bodies. [Deadly Assassin, Castrovalva] At the end of the period where he was played by John Simms, the ring he wore, possibly a receptacle for his 'mind' or a genetic memory device of some sort, was clearly picked up by a female hand. This is presumably the same female whose body he now inhabits as "Missy".

2. Gender has always been fluid.

No. Again, it hasn't. The Doctor has been through a full regeneration cycle, all of which were male. His second incarnation was given some choices as to the form he would next take, and all of them were male. There are "Time Lords" and "Time Ladies". Lady Romanadvoratrelundar, Romana for short, was a Time Lady. Her only onscreen regeneration, although unusual in that it was not forced, was one where she was able to 'try out' several bodies, and as far as I can tell/remember they were all female.

Now I realise that gender fluidity is a thing. The problem is that the internal logic of "Doctor Who" has not shown gender fluidity before and bringing it in now is unusual at the very least. Let's face it, "Finding Nemo" would have been a very different film had it been that Nemo's father set out to find Nemo, only to have turned into a female by the time the two fish actually were re-united.

I have nothing against any of the actors involved, I think this is just the last in a line of bad decisions by the production company and certain individuals within that organisation. I would also like to have seen more strong female characters in the show. Why, for example, could we not have had a number of episodes - say half a season - where we follow the antics of River Song with only a brief encounter with the Doctor in each episode. The other half season could have been the very same adventures from the perspective of the Doctor with brief points where we meet up with, or see, River song? This would have allowed us a brief glimpse into the Doctor's 'future' at the start of the season, returning to his 'present' at the middle, and then moving forward again following him.

I would also have appreciated the same sort of treatment where River is now replaced with Romana. Although this would have given up the 'crossing time streams ' effect of using River Song, it would have been possible to introduce a female character at least as strong as the Doctor himself. I think I would have preferred any of those to the return of the Rani. Any of the doctor's foes have to be defeated, and a foe that is defeated all the time loses their position as a foe and becomes a minor irritant. This means that all foes have to be used sparingly or they lose their threat, and doesn't give a strong woman a real chance at a long run.

A succession of female foes also wouldn't work in the long run, so far better a strong equal to the Doctor. However, I personally don't believe a female doctor will work and I prefer to keep my memories of "Doctor Who" as they were. I don't want the series to fail, and I know I may not be the audience they are looking for these days, so I will end by wishing "Nu-Who" all the best, and I hope they find a viable audience to carry it further into the 21st century.


An excellent well-mannered post, something sadly lacking on dr who forums.
For me i don't agree with the casting of a female dr, dr who as a show, is now so far removed from the original that its not the same show any more ( only in name ), its something completely different, its basically split into two programmes now, the original "real" dr who & Nu-who.
 
littlesue
President Solvite wrote:

Psst I have got a 3rd generation copy of Warlord and a slightly dodgy blooper reel on VHS!!

By 'eck these youngsters don't know they've been born! Grin


Some kind soul in Aussieland sent me recordings of their recordings of Series 1 (Okay the first 3 and half episodes) just after we splashed out and bought a video recorder in the mid 80s.
I still have them and I treasure them....does that make me sad?
Cold.....you don't know the meaning of cold.
Cold is when you have ice on the INSIDE of the window!!!


sues stories http://sjlittle.w...
sues youtube channel http://www.youtub...e54/videos
sues book shelf https://www.media...ne%20Shelf
rebel run video http://www.youtub...prqS-XZtLo
Lara and Sue's Stories http://lectorisal....webs.com/
 
Coser
The same complaint was raised toward GINO [Galactica In Name Only].

I have absolutely no problem with people having re-imagined Battlestar Galactica to have the names from the original as callsigns - it makes sense to me - and have some of the original male characters now as female characters. I actively want more strong female characters in shows these days as even now it seems a lot of shows are still male-led and male-oriented.

What I did object to with the BSG remake was that it was lazily written when talking about those female characters.

Starbuck, as a female character, was written no differently than the Dirk Bennedict Starbuck. A sexist, cigar smoking gambler. A character that would not have made it in any real-world military. The opportunity to have made a deeper character was not just missed, it was blown out of the water.

How much more interesting would it have been to have had a more realistic version, a woman who knows the difficulties of making her way in a male dominated profession, how much easier it would be to sink to her comrade's level, but refuses to let go of her femininity despite the extra hardships that entails? we currently have women serving in the armed forces, and I am sure that America had that before we did - wasn't that the point of having a woman soldier in the same Humvee at the 'start' of the first "Iron Man" movie? - but that doesn't mean they all have to be butch'd up. Let's see some fighting women who are also fighting to be recognised as female and not as 'inferior' versions of men.

Just as I don't want to see "Dirk Bennedict with breasts Starbuck", I don't want to see a re-imagining of "Blake's 7" with a "Paul Darrow with breasts Avon" or a "Sally Knyvette without breasts Jenna". If you're going to re-imagine a show to that sort of extent, you owe it to the actors that you cast in those roles to make a full break from what has gone before, and give those characters a new motivation and a new personality.

[just to make it clear, I don't expect that the female doctor will get a re-hash of one of the old doctor's personalities. "Doctor Who" has always been good at letting each incarnation of the Doctor be a different individual. That's something that most shows don't believe they can do.]

Of course, being able to do that is a little easier with an ensemble show like "Blake's 7" or BSG than it is with a main character show like "Doctor Who".


Oh, P.S. to my previous post - and this one.

These are my thoughts on the matter. They are no more 'correct' than anyone else's, and no more 'wrong' than anyone else's. Please feel free to disagree with anything I said. If you can disprove anything, I am open to persuasion, but if you can't prove anything, I'm going to stick to my guns.

Thank you.
"Ask ten different scientists about the environment, population control, genetics, and you'll get ten different answers, but there's one thing every scientist on the planet agrees on. Whether it happens in a hundred years or a thousand years or a million years, eventually our Sun will grow cold and go out. When that happens, it won't just take us. It'll take Marilyn Monroe, and Lao-Tzu, and Einstein, and Morobuto, and Buddy Holly, and Aristophanes…then all of this…all of this…was for nothing. Unless we go to the stars." Commander sinclair, Babylon 5.
 
Coser
littlesue wrote:
Some kind soul in Aussieland sent me recordings of their recordings of Series 1 (Okay the first 3 and half episodes) just after we splashed out and bought a video recorder in the mid 80s.
I still have them and I treasure them....does that make me sad?


Not at all, Littlesue. It makes you wise to have been able to get them in the first place. this sort of behaviour was common around that time, mainly due to the cost of the tapes. As an example, the first story from "Doctor Who" to come out on VHS was "Revenge of the Cybermen" starring Tom Baker. It's original release price was .............. around £50. For the one story, all the episodes, including the titles and recaps at the start of each episode, but no extra features. as the two countries were not showing the episodes at the same time, people regularly sent recordings of the new stories to Australia and received older stories by return. It was a good system which meant people in both places got more of the show they loved than they otherwise would have been able to.

I just wish I had been able to take part in such a thing, but of course these days there is very little to no need for such things [not to mention it always was technically illegal, and would be quite risky these days.]
"Ask ten different scientists about the environment, population control, genetics, and you'll get ten different answers, but there's one thing every scientist on the planet agrees on. Whether it happens in a hundred years or a thousand years or a million years, eventually our Sun will grow cold and go out. When that happens, it won't just take us. It'll take Marilyn Monroe, and Lao-Tzu, and Einstein, and Morobuto, and Buddy Holly, and Aristophanes…then all of this…all of this…was for nothing. Unless we go to the stars." Commander sinclair, Babylon 5.
 
littlesue
Coser wrote:

littlesue wrote:
Some kind soul in Aussieland sent me recordings of their recordings of Series 1 (Okay the first 3 and half episodes) just after we splashed out and bought a video recorder in the mid 80s.
I still have them and I treasure them....does that make me sad?


Not at all, Littlesue. It makes you wise to have been able to get them in the first place. this sort of behaviour was common around that time, mainly due to the cost of the tapes. As an example, the first story from "Doctor Who" to come out on VHS was "Revenge of the Cybermen" starring Tom Baker. It's original release price was .............. around £50. For the one story, all the episodes, including the titles and recaps at the start of each episode, but no extra features. as the two countries were not showing the episodes at the same time, people regularly sent recordings of the new stories to Australia and received older stories by return. It was a good system which meant people in both places got more of the show they loved than they otherwise would have been able to.

I just wish I had been able to take part in such a thing, but of course these days there is very little to no need for such things [not to mention it always was technically illegal, and would be quite risky these days.]


It was quite risky back then. I was always thinking that the 'Thought Police' would come knocking and have me for breach of copyright!!!!Grin
Cold.....you don't know the meaning of cold.
Cold is when you have ice on the INSIDE of the window!!!


sues stories http://sjlittle.w...
sues youtube channel http://www.youtub...e54/videos
sues book shelf https://www.media...ne%20Shelf
rebel run video http://www.youtub...prqS-XZtLo
Lara and Sue's Stories http://lectorisal....webs.com/
 
Coser
As to the new Doctor, they showed the new costume on BBC this morning. The presenters introduced it by saying it was what you got when to added Patrick Troughton's high-waist trousers, Tom baker's scarf, Peter Davisons coat, and something from Sylvester McCoy [can't remember what, sorry.]

Personally, I didn't like what I saw, and wouldn't have described it that way anyway. I don't see why anyone would describe the costume like that, what are they trying to do? Appease the fans of the classic series? Not when most of them won't watch a female Doctor anyway, and why would fans of the new version of the show care if it is based on/inspired by/ripped off from multiple previous costumes? It doesn't actually look like any of them anyway.

The 'Troughton' trousers on her are blue [IIRC], the reference to Baker's scarf is a series of horizontal lines of different colours across her top, her coat is of a completely different design to the one Davison had, but is close in colour. I mean, by those standards, I'm doing a David Tennant because I wear walking boots and a Chris Eccleston because I wear jeans.

I also have made a mistake in my previous posts. I referenced the Master having been at the end of his regeneration cycle and being able to take over new bodies with the stories "Deadly Assassin" and "Castrovalva". Castrovalva was wrong. The story I was thinking of was actually "The Keeper of Traken" where the master captures Tremas and takes over his body.
"Ask ten different scientists about the environment, population control, genetics, and you'll get ten different answers, but there's one thing every scientist on the planet agrees on. Whether it happens in a hundred years or a thousand years or a million years, eventually our Sun will grow cold and go out. When that happens, it won't just take us. It'll take Marilyn Monroe, and Lao-Tzu, and Einstein, and Morobuto, and Buddy Holly, and Aristophanes…then all of this…all of this…was for nothing. Unless we go to the stars." Commander sinclair, Babylon 5.
 
President Solvite
I am convinced I am in an alternate universe now..

What with the range of real world events where 'wrong' choices have been made. This is just the 'icing on the cake' as it were. Someone in a minute is going to tell me B7 ran for seven seasons, had several big screen movies and a Next Generation series is in the works..

I am totally with you on your sentiment on this and some great posts previously too. Well what you said wasn't technically wrong, the Master could have taken a body in the aforementioned episodes. But he either didn't quite need to having enough residual life energy to sustain him, or wasn't desperate enough then to undertake such a ghoulish existence at that specific time
 
http://nothingsforgotten.freeforums.net/
President Solvite
littlesue wrote:

President Solvite wrote:

Psst I have got a 3rd generation copy of Warlord and a slightly dodgy blooper reel on VHS!!

By 'eck these youngsters don't know they've been born! :d


Some kind soul in Aussieland sent me recordings of their recordings of Series 1 (Okay the first 3 and half episodes) just after we splashed out and bought a video recorder in the mid 80s.
I still have them and I treasure them....does that make me sad?


Well yes but I see that as a compliment. Weird and sad is good. It weird fans like ourselves, that have preserved many a gem in television and radio for future generations to see and enjoy.

We are archivists and whilst I do use and endorse new technologies there is an appeal for legacy items both from a tactile, sentimental and physical reasons and for my part a geekiness of old technologies too..

Google Maps is great but an OS Paper Pathfinder/Landranger map is portable and no need for batteries or net connection either.

Whilst some Blake's 7 books have questionable literary value I still own all of them and wouldn't part with them. You probably know which books I refer to :)
 
http://nothingsforgotten.freeforums.net/
Coser
As to littlesue,

Sad, No! You are an appreciator of the highest ranks. During the time frame we are talking about, I was one of those people who knew that this was going on, but had no-one with which to conduct this exchange with. I was hugely envious of those that were able to get such an advantage over people like myself.

Unfortunately Grin this also means you are not normal either. You are not one of those who aspired to such heights, you achieved them - and who wants to be 'normal' anyway? bunch of beige wearing, beige thinking underachievers, 'normal' people. We are better than that.

Also you are not treasuring a home recording of a couple of episodes of a TV show, especially one that can be seen on DVD now. You are treasuring the memories that go with it. The memories of seeing it for the first time, your feelings and emotions that you went through when you watched it for the first time. The actual tape has very little to do with it, but those memories and feelings are PRICELESS.

You treasure it as a focus for those memories, and be proud of it!
"Ask ten different scientists about the environment, population control, genetics, and you'll get ten different answers, but there's one thing every scientist on the planet agrees on. Whether it happens in a hundred years or a thousand years or a million years, eventually our Sun will grow cold and go out. When that happens, it won't just take us. It'll take Marilyn Monroe, and Lao-Tzu, and Einstein, and Morobuto, and Buddy Holly, and Aristophanes…then all of this…all of this…was for nothing. Unless we go to the stars." Commander sinclair, Babylon 5.
 
Zenrac
Coser, I saw the same news broadcast yesterday morning, with regard the costume to be worn by the new Doctor. And I rarely watch the news these days because the morning news programming especially is just another modern social dumbing down, full of political persuasion, with a war of narrative in existence between the BBC and SKY. It is crass.

However, I had the same channel on first thing, the same avenue of broadcast that was last on my device the evening before, as I got ready to head out - that being an actual television. I hear you. You are correct. How they managed to correlate classic Who colours/costume with the new 'uniform' I have no idea. The link was extremely tenuous, something that shouldn't surprise me what with the lack of originality, writing practice and presentation that pervades modern Who.

Calling such out is not a failure of acceptance, either. Just because some of us are of an older generation should not silence our voice just because we see these things through more mature eyes. Personally, I see a lot of modern life as awful - social media being my main bugbear. But maybe that is a conversation for another time, on another thread.

At the risk of repeating myself, the whole of modern Who is wrong. The whole disrespect with regard ethos is such a shame. I know there is a whole new generation to appease, to introduce, and to satisfy, but it is at the expense of any known (at least known to me) reasonable intelligence quota. It is smash and grab TV. I do not see it as sustainable what with the modern practice of having no attention span or longevity built in.

We can, therefore, only live in hope that some semblance of sense prevails.
 
Rainesz
Oh, everyone lighten up! Wink So much doom and gloom, but that goes with a Blake's 7 perspective, lol.
It'll be fun! I'm excited for the change. All the little kids I've talked to at our bookstore love Jodie and think she's cool.
Give her (and the new team) a chance. Grin
 
Zenrac
I don't think there is a single individual here who has totally written it off. After all, how can you write something off until you have eaten the proof pudding?

It is whether you give it the chance in the first place, after the recent historical past.

For the small children of this modern generation, well, they have their eyes wide open. They are, hopefully, agog, sat watching their Doctor, male or female. Modern children are not living in the same world some of us older folk are. We will see it through completely different eyes. To crush a child's dreams is awful. If it works for the current younger folks then for them, I am happy. Enjoy away.

I will watch. If I do not like it, I will no longer watch. We all have the power to simply skip channels, or, switch off the TV and do something less boring instead.

If Jodie wins out in the chosen demographic, then for those inside that bubble, more power to them.
 
Endless Midnight
1. Gender has been fluid since the 'revelation' of The Master/Missy situation.

No. It hasn't. Gender wasn't fluid until the remark of a Galifreyan guard(? possibly general or something like that) who regenerated into a woman's body and said how good it was to be female again. The Master/Missy situation is unique. The Master used all of his regenerations back during the 4th incarnation of the Doctor. He was able to absorb energy direct from the Eye of Harmony and has since been able to take over others bodies. [Deadly Assassin, Castrovalva] At the end of the period where he was played by John Simms, the ring he wore, possibly a receptacle for his 'mind' or a genetic memory device of some sort, was clearly picked up by a female hand. This is presumably the same female whose body he now inhabits as "Missy".


While I don't want to get involved in arguments about the rights and wrongs of casting women as the Doctor, I do feel a need to answer this, as I'm afraid the above is a highly inaccurate argument, and demonstrably incorrect in places, probably because of either misremembering the episodes or having missed some.

First, while it is true that the Master was indeed at the end of his regeneration cycle from The Deadly Assassin through to his appearance in the TV Movie, the 21st Century revival has already made it clear that this is no longer the case. The Master explains, in The Sound of Drums, that he was revived - brought back to life in some form - during the Time War, and it's been shown that he can now regenerate normally again, without having to possess anyone's body, hence his ability to simply turn from Derek Jacobi into John Simm in Utopia without any other party becoming involved.

Secondly, the female hand picking up the ring is fully explained in The End of Time, David Tennant's last story. We are actually shown who the woman doing that was - a blonde and rather stern-faced warder from the prison holding Lucy Saxon. She and some others use this ring to conduct a ceremony which reconstitutes the Master, effectively bringing him back to life, still in his John Simm incarnation. He then continues in this story, without regenerating, and is still in that incarnation at the end of it. We can therefore say quite categorically that the woman picking up the ring has no narrative connection at all with the Michelle Gomez incarnation.

In the most recent story shown, the Cybermen two parter at the end of the Peter Capaldi season this year, both Masters kill each other. Simm's is established as dating from after The End of Time, when he says he had no wish to hang around on Gallifrey - where he had been banished to at the end of that earlier story - and so left again. It is established also that Simm's Master is about to regenerate when we last see him here, where he is wounded and descending through the ship in a lift. We don't know for sure whether the Gomez incarnation will be the immediately succeeding one - there may be one or more further incarnations that come in between who haven't been shown on television - but she is certainly from after him anyway. Moreover, it is also explained that Simm's Master uses a weapon that will prevent Gomez's from being able to regenerate - in other words, were it not for that, she too would be about to change again.

There's no doubt therefore, that the Master has, in having been brought back to life during the Time War, also been given a new regeneration cycle, much as also happens with the Doctor at the end of The Time of the Doctor, Matt Smith's last story. Therefore, the Master and the Doctor are now both in the same situation - both are in secondary regeneration cycles, the new ones starting with the Derek Jacobi and Peter Capaldi incarnations respectively (unless there were any other untelevised ones before the former).

So, there is no problem with saying that, within the fiction, Michelle Gomez's Missy incarnation is a perfectly valid precedent for any subsequent female Doctor. Both Time Lords are now regenerating in exactly the same way.
Edited by Endless Midnight on 10 November 2017 21:37:55
 
dragonq
Just saw the photo of the costume; that’s right, cast a female doctor, draw attention to her boobs by plastering stripes across them, and then assure us it’s a reference to Tom Baker's scarf.
 
sweevo
What the hell am I looking at!?
 
JustBrad
Endless Midnight wrote:


There's no doubt therefore, that the Master has, in having been brought back to life during the Time War, also been given a new regeneration cycle...


Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but don't we actually see Derek Jacobi regenerate into John Simm?
 
Endless Midnight
JustBrad wrote:

Endless Midnight wrote:


There's no doubt therefore, that the Master has, in having been brought back to life during the Time War, also been given a new regeneration cycle...


Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but don't we actually see Derek Jacobi regenerate into John Simm?


Yes, we do, in the closing scenes of Utopia.
 
Angry Angel
Rainesz wrote:

Oh, everyone lighten up! Wink So much doom and gloom, but that goes with a Blake's 7 perspective, lol.
It'll be fun! I'm excited for the change. All the little kids I've talked to at our bookstore love Jodie and think she's cool.
Give her (and the new team) a chance. Grin


I know! I think she's going to be interesting, and her clothes will reflect her personality, probably a lot different from the often grumpy Capaldi incarnation. Anyone else think her coat looks like one Romana II once wore?
 
http://lucyravenscar.blogspot.com/
Jump to Forum:
Orac rendered this page in 0.66 seconds
9,501,843 unique visits since 8th January 2014