Options
Annoying Doctor Who myths that are accepted even by a lot of fans
Tom Tit
Posts: 2,554 Forum Member
✭✭✭
Let's vent (like on every other thread :P). I'm not after things like 'Doctor Who fights the Daleks every week', but myths so ingrained even a lot of fans believe them.
This one gets repeated over and over, and I saw it again the other night on 'the Ultimate Doctor Who Guide', or whatever it was called - an official BBC production for the 50th anniversary no less:
'The Dalek's couldn't go up stairs until the episode 'Dalek' (the woefully uninformed version of the myth)
OR
'The Daleks couldn't go up stairs until the serial 'Remembrance of the Daleks' (the only slightly more informed version of the myth)
and that either of them was 'the first time a Dalek had been seen to levitate'.
A Dalek was first seen to levitate way back in Doctor Who's second season with William Hartnell, in 'The Chase', when it rose up out of a sandy landscape, quite a respectable way above the ground. Granted, it wasn't shown to actually go up stairs but it's act of levitation must have been a clear signal that theoretically it could do so, if it happened to find itself on a planet with stairs, to any but the most cognitively challenged viewer.
Yes, this 'hilarious' joke about the weakness of Daleks abounded almost immediately, and the producers took steps to nip it in the bud immediately by showing them not to have this weakness, way back in 1964. Unfortunately, the public at large seemed to pay no attention, and many fans too it seems.
This one gets repeated over and over, and I saw it again the other night on 'the Ultimate Doctor Who Guide', or whatever it was called - an official BBC production for the 50th anniversary no less:
'The Dalek's couldn't go up stairs until the episode 'Dalek' (the woefully uninformed version of the myth)
OR
'The Daleks couldn't go up stairs until the serial 'Remembrance of the Daleks' (the only slightly more informed version of the myth)
and that either of them was 'the first time a Dalek had been seen to levitate'.
A Dalek was first seen to levitate way back in Doctor Who's second season with William Hartnell, in 'The Chase', when it rose up out of a sandy landscape, quite a respectable way above the ground. Granted, it wasn't shown to actually go up stairs but it's act of levitation must have been a clear signal that theoretically it could do so, if it happened to find itself on a planet with stairs, to any but the most cognitively challenged viewer.
Yes, this 'hilarious' joke about the weakness of Daleks abounded almost immediately, and the producers took steps to nip it in the bud immediately by showing them not to have this weakness, way back in 1964. Unfortunately, the public at large seemed to pay no attention, and many fans too it seems.
0
Comments
I did think the levitating started back somewhere in the classics though!
I think it's gone to great pains to clarify that we don't know his name. Cos if it were spoken on Trenzalore it'd reopen the Time War, etc. Dr. Who might be a nickname, but it's clearly not his birth name.
I think it's gone to Great Plains to clarify that we don't know anything about his name. Neither what it is nor what it isn't. Running around confirming everything that his name isn't would be the same as just saying what it is.
As to why it's an annoying myth? It's almost like one of those folk etymologies (see also: you don't use an apostrophe on its "... because that's a special case"), where people think they're cleverer than other people for repeating things that, while being a little closer to true (eg, there really isn't an apostrophe in its) but nevertheless actually don't pass the test for fact.
You are correct. It is actually a Wonkavator 2.0 with better time management functions.
Oh, brilliant. That made me
That isn't a myth though, that's your opinion. Personally I think it's one of the best stories in New Who and is far better than anything that's been shown since. But that's my opinion and not some myth that I can claim as to being true.
Anyway, I have several annoying myths and gripes that annoy me:
1) That New Who is superior to Classic Who as it has better Special Effects and Production Values
Now on their own those two facts are true but some people genuinely do believe that this gives them the right to slate Classic Who as being unwatchable because of the opposite case. They also think the New Series stories are better in every sense too and this always drives me mad. As I've mentioned several times on here before, the story is what matters and no amount of Special Effects can cover a poor story. I will always challenge this view as I deeply believe it to be untrue and though Classic Who had it's fair share of Poor Stories too, I feel it can challenge many a New Series Episode simply by having a better story, even if the production values aren't upto scratch sometimes.
2) That Black and White Who is dull and boring
Not going to elaborate on this too much as I started a thread on this recently but it's simply not true and as above many stories of the Sixties can hold their own against some of today's stuff
3) The First Doctor was permanently grumpy and unlikeable
Now this drives me even more mad than the above. The fact that William Hartnell's Doctor spent his entire time being grumpy and unpleasant and having a go at everyone. Now there is a truth to it that there were times the First Doctor was stern and tetchy but it wasn't in every single scene he was in.
I think it can be agreed that the first three stories he wasn't at his best but the character did mellow. Stories like The Romans, where he played the role in a comedic way and in The Time Meddler where having Peter Butterworth in the story provided for some funny banter, these are examples of the First Doctor's lighter side. There was always some funny scenes with Ian too, like getting his name wrong or ruining his school tie in The Web Planet. I could go on, but the point is, he wasn't always grumpy and unlikeable.
I put this Myth down to mostly New Series Fans who have got used to younger Doctors like Tennant and Smith being funny and cool and therefore they see Hartnell as something he actually wasn't. On his day he could be just as eccentric and funny as any other Doctor and I think it's a shame his popularity isn't higher. Without him, we wouldn't have a show today.
4) The Fifth Doctor was a wimp
As my fave Doctor, this drives me mad more than any other myth. Yes, there were times like in Earthshock where he did act a bit wimpy and a bit too passive but there are so many examples in his era where he stood upto the bad guy and took control. The Mara, The Master, Sharaz Jek, Captain Striker. All of these he gave a bit of what for and showed authority.
Even non villainous characters he showed authority, like Richard Mace in The Visitation and Dr Todd in Kinda. And what about Tegan? Through all her arguments with him, she rarely got her own way and she was probably the strongest companion there has been in terms of temper.
So I'm sorry but I really don't accept he was a total wimp, though I agree he had his vulnerable moments but as with Hartnell's grumpiness, it wasn't in every scene.
5)The Sixth Doctor was permanently unlikeable.
Again, as with the previous two Doctors, this simply isn't true.
A lot of this perception is based on The Twin Dilemma and several scenes, notably Timelash, in Season 22. In Season 23, there are clear signs that he was moving away from his initial portrayal and that more humour was coming into the part. It only takes watching the first and last episodes of Colin Baker's Era to appreciate how much he'd changed between the two.
It always saddens me when he sits bottom of the Polls or is the first to go on a Hurt and Heal Game. I just think people should try and look for the better qualities in his Doctor and see beyond The Twin Dilemma portrayal as that story simply isn't typical of his eventual interpretation in the role.
Had he stayed longer I've no doubt he would have turned out to be a Popular Doctor in his own right.
One that does annoy me is the wobbly sets myth.
I think it was from some random 'monster night' on Channel 5 or something, I remembered they'd put the script up, no idea if there's any clips (maybe Phil Morris can have a look?)
That thing you just said - it's not always the case. Sometime it's got an apostrophe, sometimes its apostrophe is gone.
- It is blasphemy to want to see the Rani again
- Russell T Davies is God
I feel exactly the same way Jack. I want to correct people, but don't because I know I'm being appallingly pedantic and petty, and frankly no-one else cares.
I get the same with David Bowie. It's definitely Bowie as in 'Oh no', not Bowie as in 'Now then' but I know that no-one else gives a monkeys...
Other myths - despite being a huge Who fan, I've never worn an anorak...
Why shouldn't they call him Doctor Who? Just because he doesn't call himself that?
Love his stuff but I have tended to pronounce Bowie both ways. Now I know...it's David Bow (ties are cool) ie.
People referring to 'Doctor Spock from Star Trek' makes it hard for me to button my lip. (Sorry, going a bit off topic there.)
Well, it's a fair point I suppose.
Although... just 'cause I don't call myself, say, Ian Chesterton, I'm not sure I'd like to be called that...
That's not the Dalek that levitates!