Nope. Still confused I'm afraid Me saying it was ridiculous to cast aspersions about someone based on their decisions was my way of saying why are you calling someone a luvvie, diva and up themselves etc simply based on their decision not to return? That's the same point that I've been trying to make all the way through this thread, although obviously I'm not doing a very good job of it.
That's funny. So, the "cast aspersions" quote didn't mean what it actually said, it was just "your way" of saying something completely different.
Regardless, as I've already explained, I'm not calling someone a luvvie or diva based on their decision not to return to the role. There is an actual quote of mine mentioning that - rest assured you can be sure that my quotes rarely would mean something different to what they actually say, unlike yours apparently.
That's funny. So, the "cast aspersions" quote didn't mean what it actually said, it was just "your way" of saying something completely different.
Regardless, as I've already explained, I'm not calling someone a luvvie or diva based on their decision not to return to the role. There is an actual quote of mine mentioning that - rest assured you can be sure that my quotes rarely would mean something different to what they actually say, unlike yours apparently.
Good grief. I'm getting a headache. I'm not really sure that I know what the confusion is anymore. I think what I originally said and what I am saying now both mean the same, they're just different ways of saying the same thing.
I assumed if Eccles had said "yes" Moff would have written him a good part. It's only likely to be "not necessary" to the plot for him to physically be there because he said "no".
I think Eccleson will apperar in dr who, but only briefly, dont know how long filming will take, could be the biggest secret and surprise
So eccleson said no, but moffat say, I write you a 5 min scene, and promise you, you love it, so eccleson agrees, and they film this indoors, and at a film studio
So eccleson doctor appear, along with the other 2; tennant, smith, in front of these 2 eccleson is exterminated by the daleks, so end eccleson part in the 50th
Has chris ever explained why he wanted to become doctor who? What motivated a shy actor to take such a public role?
It was the challenge of the role, that and the fact that RTD was the writer, iirc. It should also be noted that he asked to be considered rather than the other way around.
Comments
That's funny. So, the "cast aspersions" quote didn't mean what it actually said, it was just "your way" of saying something completely different.
Regardless, as I've already explained, I'm not calling someone a luvvie or diva based on their decision not to return to the role. There is an actual quote of mine mentioning that - rest assured you can be sure that my quotes rarely would mean something different to what they actually say, unlike yours apparently.
Good grief. I'm getting a headache. I'm not really sure that I know what the confusion is anymore. I think what I originally said and what I am saying now both mean the same, they're just different ways of saying the same thing.
I think Eccleson will apperar in dr who, but only briefly, dont know how long filming will take, could be the biggest secret and surprise
So eccleson said no, but moffat say, I write you a 5 min scene, and promise you, you love it, so eccleson agrees, and they film this indoors, and at a film studio
So eccleson doctor appear, along with the other 2; tennant, smith, in front of these 2 eccleson is exterminated by the daleks, so end eccleson part in the 50th
Any actor would be mad not to if given the opportunity. It's what he does for a living.
It was the challenge of the role, that and the fact that RTD was the writer, iirc. It should also be noted that he asked to be considered rather than the other way around.