Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zeke
Interesting -- I've been fairly unimpressed with Billie Piper, and quite impressed with Chris Eccleston. Mileage varying, I guess.
I can certainly see how Eccleston is "brutish" compared to past Doctors. But isn't that sort of difference the whole point? If you're going to recast one character over and over, you need significant differences between the actors, or it'll just be dull. I found the casting choice weird too, but Eccleston's Doctor wasn't just wacky -- he could be plenty serious when he needed to be. Maybe he didn't prove himself to you, but to many viewers he did.
Besides, we're geeks. We have to put up with this stuff all the time. Take videogames. How many different Links have Zelda fans had to get used to now? How many Mega Men? How many Samuses? Or take comics. How many ways have Superman and Batman been reinterpreted and reinvented over the years? How many takes on Spider-Man have we seen? If you don't keep a little mental elasticity, you can miss out on some great stuff.
|
Zeke, yes, you need a little change. But what Russel T. Davies has done is completely change the Doctor's underlying character, which is present in EVERY previous incarnation, to suit his own agenda. I don't find any fault with a wacky or serious Doctor, I can deal with either or both at the same time (just NO MORE multi-Doctor stories. EVER! PLEASE!), but my problem is with Russel T. Davies' appaling plots (Boom Town, please, take this knife, and go into that corner...), and horrible scripts.......I mean, what kind of a person writes the word "FANTASTIC" into every episode at least once? Aside from Pip & Jane Baker, I mean...