I think it's generally accepted that the "Dr. Who" played by Peter Cushing is a completely different character to the television Doctors, which is why he's never included in the list of those playing the part.
Great though the films are, they departed too far from the TV series' format to be considered "canon".
Peter Cushing's Doctor was human, no suggestion of him being alien at all, letalone a Time Lord!
That alone is enough for him to only be considered as "A Doctor" rather than "The Doctor"!
That's the third actor called Peter to play the doctor..
Wrong. Peter Capaldi is the second actor named Peter to play the Doctor.
However much you like Peter Cushing's portrayal of the time traveller in those two (very good) sixties films, it doesn't change the fact that the aforementioned time traveller is not part of the Doctor Who canon.
i think it hard to decide whether to add Peter Cushing as an official Doctor as his movies were remakes of William Hartnell Stories
It's very easy to decide. Peter Cushing, very good though he was in those films, is NOT ... repeat NOT an official Doctor.
It still amazes me that so many people think he is. I've even encountered someone who thinks that Cushing's Doctor is canon, but McGann's Doctor isn't. Ludicrous!
featured a character called Doctor Who. He was not a Time Lord but a regular human. He was an inventor and built the Tardis. He and his family traveled to a war ravaged Skaro (planet of the Daleks).
Interesting to note - the Doctor Who and the Daleks film was based on the Doctor Who tv series 'The Daleks' broadcast 1963/1964. In the original tv series version, of course, the Doctor was a Time Lord and not human.
Strictly speaking Peter Cushing did not play the Doctor. He played a human that was remarkably similar to the Doctor but not the genuine article.
Well as its an adaptation of both serials then he's the doctor just as the daleks are the daleks. Cannon is for fan boys that need things to be tidy and organised. But for me he's playing the Doctor.
Interesting to note - the Doctor Who and the Daleks film was based on the Doctor Who tv series 'The Daleks' broadcast 1963/1964. In the original tv series version, of course, the Doctor was a Time Lord and not human.
Just to clarify, Ray... in the original tv series the Doctor was NOT strictly a Time Lord until The War Games revealed him to be one. With hindsight we can assume that he always was a Time Lord, but certainly at the time of the tv serials The Daleks and Dalek Invasion Of Earth the Doctor was merely a mysterious and unexplained traveller - "Susan and I are cut off from our own planet - without friends or protection. But one day we shall get back. Yes, one day...." He could have been, and was probably intended to be, human, but from a future civilisation on another planet.
His 'renewal' (it wasn't actually called 'regeneration' until Planet of the Spiders) at the Tenth Planet was the first concrete evidence that the Doctor definitely wasn't human.
However, the Peter Cushing character definitely was human. No hint of him being an alien, or from another time or civilization. And he was called Doctor Who. I'm constantly baffled by people's attempts to somehow retcon Cushing into the continuity of the tv series. Can't we all accept that the two Cushing films, charming and entertaining though they are, simply do not, will not, and should not be shoehorned into the tv series history, and they were never intended to be.
Well as its an adaptation of both serials then he's the doctor just as the daleks are the daleks. Cannon is for fan boys that need things to be tidy and organised. But for me he's playing the Doctor.
I have to say that I don't agree that "[The Doctor] could have been, and was probably intended to be, human, but from a future civilisation on another planet."
It has always been pretty clear to me that the Doctor character was always intended to be an alien.
I would be interested to know if any of the BBC documentation from the early days of the series actually backs that up.
One of the earliest character outlines of the Doctor (or Doctor Who as he was being called at this point) runs as follows -
DR. WHO A frail old man lost in space and time. They give him this name because they don't know who he is. He seems not to remember where he has come from; he is suspicious and capable of sudden malignance; he seems to have some undefined enemy; he is searching for something as well as fleeing from something. He has a "machine" which enables them to travel together through time, through space, and through matter.
By May 1963 this had been expanded somewhat with the an indication that the Doctor may be more than human -
DR. WHO
A name given to him by his three earthly friends because neither he nor they know who he is. Dr. Who is about 650 years old. Frail looking but wiry and tough like an old turkey - is amply demonstrated whenever he is forced to run from danger. His watery blue eyes are continually looking around in bewilderment and occasionally a look of utter malevolence clouds his face as he suspects his earthly friends of being part of some conspiracy. He seems not to remember where he comes from but he has flashes of garbled memory which indicate that he was involved in a galactic war and still fears pursuit by some undefined enemy. Because he is somewhat pathetic his three friends continually try to help him find his way 'home', but they are never sure of his motives.
THE SHIP
Dr. Who has a 'ship' which enables them to travel together through space, through time, and through matter. When first seen, this ship has the appearance of a police telephone box standing in the street, but anyone entering it finds himself inside an extensive electronic contrivance. Though it looks impressive, it is an old beat-up model which Dr. Who stole when he escaped from his own galaxy in the year 5733; it is uncertain in performance; moreover, Dr. Who isn't quite sure how to work it, so they have to learn by trial and error.
Other comments in the preparatory documents indicated that he might possess some great secret, though Sydney Newman didn't like this idea. It was always indicated that he was from the future, but was somehow cut off from, or possibly exiled from, this future civilization. In some documents his home is a future civilization on a distant planet, but the interesting point though is his suggested age - 650 years old. This however is the only indication that he may not be simply a future human. And, what I find most significant, as soon as script editor David Whitaker came on board in July 1963 the Doctor's age was modified to a far more obviously human age of 'over sixty', thus removing the only real indication that the Doctor wasn't human.
The original pilot has Susan stating she was born in the 49th century. In the transmitted An Unearthly Child this is changed to the more vague 'another time, another world' which, although this may hint at alien origins, still doesn't definitely prove they were not simply future humans from another planet. This is certainly what I believe was David Whitaker's intention.
featured a character called Doctor Who. He was not a Time Lord but a regular human. He was an inventor and built the Tardis. He and his family traveled to a war ravaged Skaro (planet of the Daleks).
Interesting to note - the Doctor Who and the Daleks film was based on the Doctor Who tv series 'The Daleks' broadcast 1963/1964. In the original tv series version, of course, the Doctor was a Time Lord and not human.
Strictly speaking Peter Cushing did not play the Doctor. He played a human that was remarkably similar to the Doctor but not the genuine article.
To be fair the term "Time Lord" was not used in Doctor Who until 1969
Clearly its not a continuation but an adaptation of the tv series. however. Benedict cumberbatch is playing Holmes in a very loose adaptation of the character but he's still Holmes in many peoples eyes.. Is there a reason the Doctor is more sacred?
The Sherlock Holmes comparison is interesting but doesn't match up with the Doctor in that Cumberbatch is not playing the same character as the one written in the original books. The new Moffat / Gatiss series are loosely based on the original character, but in no way are the modern day stories meant to be a continuation of the original.
Doctor Who is different in that the Doctor himself is the same person, from 1963 until today, albeit in 11 (or 12) different incarnations. The continuing nature of his character, and the fact that each new incarnation builds on what has gone before makes the Doctor very different from other fictional characters who are re-cast or re-imagined over time. The fact that Doctor Who has the ability to re-cast the lead actor and make that a crucial part of the ongoing story narrative sets the series apart from virtually any other fiction.
And, getting back to the original point, Cushing doesn't fit into the ongoing story as he was never intended to be part of the continuing tv series.
Clearly its not a continuation but an adaptation of the tv series. however. Benedict cumberbatch is playing Holmes in a very loose adaptation of the character but he's still Holmes in many peoples eyes.. Is there a reason the Doctor is more sacred?
Not a good comparison. The character of Sherlock Holmes doesn't regenerate and no two actors play Holmes in the same fictional universe.
I can't remember where I read it, but I'm sure there was an attempt to include the cushing films in canon with the idea that upon her return and marriage, Susan wrote books of her adventures, changing the Doctor into a Human in the fiction. These books were then made into films starring human actor Peter Cushing.
And my point that keeps getting missed is that I don't believe it is cannon.. I believe it's an adaptation and as such he is playing the doctor. In the same way that Jonathan rhys Myers is playing Dracula shortly.. As an American.. Still Dracula though.. As someone who has watched regularly since 74 I still embrace cushings doctor.. Not as part of the tv serial but as an interpretation..
I can't remember where I read it, but I'm sure there was an attempt to include the cushing films in canon with the idea that upon her return and marriage, Susan wrote books of her adventures, changing the Doctor into a Human in the fiction. These books were then made into films starring human actor Peter Cushing.
I've always liked that idea...
I've read something similar, but the films were adapted from Barbara's memoirs in this case.
It would be quite neat if this was mentioned on-screen.
featured a character called Doctor Who. He was not a Time Lord but a regular human. He was an inventor and built the Tardis. He and his family traveled to a war ravaged Skaro (planet of the Daleks).
Interesting to note - the Doctor Who and the Daleks film was based on the Doctor Who tv series 'The Daleks' broadcast 1963/1964. In the original tv series version, of course, the Doctor was a Time Lord and not human.
Strictly speaking Peter Cushing did not play the Doctor. He played a human that was remarkably similar to the Doctor but not the genuine article.
And my point that keeps getting missed is that I don't believe it is cannon.. I believe it's an adaptation and as such he is playing the doctor. In the same way that Jonathan rhys Myers is playing Dracula shortly.. As an American.. Still Dracula though.. As someone who has watched regularly since 74 I still embrace cushings doctor.. Not as part of the tv serial but as an interpretation..
Just to clarify, Ray... in the original tv series the Doctor was NOT strictly a Time Lord until The War Games revealed him to be one. With hindsight we can assume that he always was a Time Lord, but certainly at the time of the tv serials The Daleks and Dalek Invasion Of Earth the Doctor was merely a mysterious and unexplained traveller - "Susan and I are cut off from our own planet - without friends or protection. But one day we shall get back. Yes, one day...." He could have been, and was probably intended to be, human, but from a future civilisation on another planet.
His 'renewal' (it wasn't actually called 'regeneration' until Planet of the Spiders) at the Tenth Planet was the first concrete evidence that the Doctor definitely wasn't human.
However, the Peter Cushing character definitely was human. No hint of him being an alien, or from another time or civilization. And he was called Doctor Who. I'm constantly baffled by people's attempts to somehow retcon Cushing into the continuity of the tv series. Can't we all accept that the two Cushing films, charming and entertaining though they are, simply do not, will not, and should not be shoehorned into the tv series history, and they were never intended to be.
When did the whole two hearts thing come into Doctor Who?
![[Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d8f2283fd272e6e233552cfeffccc941.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 137
Comments
i think it hard to decide whether to add Peter Cushing as an official Doctor as his movies were remakes of William Hartnell Stories
Great though the films are, they departed too far from the TV series' format to be considered "canon".
Peter Cushing's Doctor was human, no suggestion of him being alien at all, letalone a Time Lord!
That alone is enough for him to only be considered as "A Doctor" rather than "The Doctor"!
O...kayyyy - and the significance of this is...?
Peter Capaldi is going to play the Doctor.
Since we don't know the Doctor's actual surname, it's possible (however rather unlikely) it's Who.
Who is the Doctor?
Yes.
No, who is the Doctor?
Yes.
Stop saying that. I'm asking you who is the doctor?
Yes.
Wrong. Peter Capaldi is the second actor named Peter to play the Doctor.
However much you like Peter Cushing's portrayal of the time traveller in those two (very good) sixties films, it doesn't change the fact that the aforementioned time traveller is not part of the Doctor Who canon.
It's very easy to decide. Peter Cushing, very good though he was in those films, is NOT ... repeat NOT an official Doctor.
It still amazes me that so many people think he is. I've even encountered someone who thinks that Cushing's Doctor is canon, but McGann's Doctor isn't. Ludicrous!
The two Doctor Who films from the 1960s:
Dr. Who and the Daleks (1965)
and
Daleks – Invasion Earth: 2150 A.D. (1966)
featured a character called Doctor Who. He was not a Time Lord but a regular human. He was an inventor and built the Tardis. He and his family traveled to a war ravaged Skaro (planet of the Daleks).
Interesting to note - the Doctor Who and the Daleks film was based on the Doctor Who tv series 'The Daleks' broadcast 1963/1964. In the original tv series version, of course, the Doctor was a Time Lord and not human.
Strictly speaking Peter Cushing did not play the Doctor. He played a human that was remarkably similar to the Doctor but not the genuine article.
Just to clarify, Ray... in the original tv series the Doctor was NOT strictly a Time Lord until The War Games revealed him to be one. With hindsight we can assume that he always was a Time Lord, but certainly at the time of the tv serials The Daleks and Dalek Invasion Of Earth the Doctor was merely a mysterious and unexplained traveller - "Susan and I are cut off from our own planet - without friends or protection. But one day we shall get back. Yes, one day...." He could have been, and was probably intended to be, human, but from a future civilisation on another planet.
His 'renewal' (it wasn't actually called 'regeneration' until Planet of the Spiders) at the Tenth Planet was the first concrete evidence that the Doctor definitely wasn't human.
However, the Peter Cushing character definitely was human. No hint of him being an alien, or from another time or civilization. And he was called Doctor Who. I'm constantly baffled by people's attempts to somehow retcon Cushing into the continuity of the tv series. Can't we all accept that the two Cushing films, charming and entertaining though they are, simply do not, will not, and should not be shoehorned into the tv series history, and they were never intended to be.
Include Cushing and you have to include all these actors who have played the Doctor in one form or another.
It has always been pretty clear to me that the Doctor character was always intended to be an alien.
I would be interested to know if any of the BBC documentation from the early days of the series actually backs that up.
DR. WHO A frail old man lost in space and time. They give him this name because they don't know who he is. He seems not to remember where he has come from; he is suspicious and capable of sudden malignance; he seems to have some undefined enemy; he is searching for something as well as fleeing from something. He has a "machine" which enables them to travel together through time, through space, and through matter.
By May 1963 this had been expanded somewhat with the an indication that the Doctor may be more than human -
DR. WHO
A name given to him by his three earthly friends because neither he nor they know who he is. Dr. Who is about 650 years old. Frail looking but wiry and tough like an old turkey - is amply demonstrated whenever he is forced to run from danger. His watery blue eyes are continually looking around in bewilderment and occasionally a look of utter malevolence clouds his face as he suspects his earthly friends of being part of some conspiracy. He seems not to remember where he comes from but he has flashes of garbled memory which indicate that he was involved in a galactic war and still fears pursuit by some undefined enemy. Because he is somewhat pathetic his three friends continually try to help him find his way 'home', but they are never sure of his motives.
THE SHIP
Dr. Who has a 'ship' which enables them to travel together through space, through time, and through matter. When first seen, this ship has the appearance of a police telephone box standing in the street, but anyone entering it finds himself inside an extensive electronic contrivance. Though it looks impressive, it is an old beat-up model which Dr. Who stole when he escaped from his own galaxy in the year 5733; it is uncertain in performance; moreover, Dr. Who isn't quite sure how to work it, so they have to learn by trial and error.
Other comments in the preparatory documents indicated that he might possess some great secret, though Sydney Newman didn't like this idea. It was always indicated that he was from the future, but was somehow cut off from, or possibly exiled from, this future civilization. In some documents his home is a future civilization on a distant planet, but the interesting point though is his suggested age - 650 years old. This however is the only indication that he may not be simply a future human. And, what I find most significant, as soon as script editor David Whitaker came on board in July 1963 the Doctor's age was modified to a far more obviously human age of 'over sixty', thus removing the only real indication that the Doctor wasn't human.
The original pilot has Susan stating she was born in the 49th century. In the transmitted An Unearthly Child this is changed to the more vague 'another time, another world' which, although this may hint at alien origins, still doesn't definitely prove they were not simply future humans from another planet. This is certainly what I believe was David Whitaker's intention.
To be fair the term "Time Lord" was not used in Doctor Who until 1969
And William Hartnell is credited as Dr. Who
http://i.imgur.com/iyBq6pJ.png
Doctor Who is different in that the Doctor himself is the same person, from 1963 until today, albeit in 11 (or 12) different incarnations. The continuing nature of his character, and the fact that each new incarnation builds on what has gone before makes the Doctor very different from other fictional characters who are re-cast or re-imagined over time. The fact that Doctor Who has the ability to re-cast the lead actor and make that a crucial part of the ongoing story narrative sets the series apart from virtually any other fiction.
And, getting back to the original point, Cushing doesn't fit into the ongoing story as he was never intended to be part of the continuing tv series.
Not a good comparison. The character of Sherlock Holmes doesn't regenerate and no two actors play Holmes in the same fictional universe.
I've always liked that idea...
I've read something similar, but the films were adapted from Barbara's memoirs in this case.
It would be quite neat if this was mentioned on-screen.
I just love being educated! :rolleyes:
I get you seanyboy!
When did the whole two hearts thing come into Doctor Who?