The theatricality of Matt's delivery
![[Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/faf62f0eb9d6c7f54c85e948eeaf1fa6.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 7,134 Forum Member
✭
Hello:)
Is that Matt or Moffat?
The delivery- pause- grandstanding last word.
Clash of music crescendo.
Tennant wasn't theatrical, more understated in his delivery.
Low key even- on the big notes
I prefer the Matt/Moffat combination.
Is that Matt or Moffat?
The delivery- pause- grandstanding last word.
Clash of music crescendo.
Tennant wasn't theatrical, more understated in his delivery.
Low key even- on the big notes
I prefer the Matt/Moffat combination.
0
Comments
I haven't seen Matt in anything else, so I don't know if it's his normal style, or something he's adopted for DW, perhaps to bring out the alienness of the Doctor, or the barminess of the 11th Doctor.
I like it too
He was the same in the death of the doctor, written by RTD, so I assume quite a substantial part must be Matt, or he has truly taken on Moffat's direction. Or even better RTD and Moffat directed him the same way.
I love Matt's theatrical performance, whether it will stand the test of time (e.g. 3 series or more) remains to be seen. I could see it grating on me at some point.
Only now, away from the magic of those worded moments, can I see how aware Matt is of their power.
He read them, envisaged how the scene would go- how powerful those words could be and then acted.
Should those scenes have that much premeditation?
Should we decide if those words are bone-jarringly beautiful, or the actor?
Should they be presented in a way to remove all doubt that the moment is powerful?
When they talk of a children's show- is that what they mean?
That we get thematically escorted everywhere?
I remember having read that Moffat actually wrote Matt's lines for TEOT...
Ah but I referred to the death of the doctor not TEOT;):D, or are you suggesting that Moffat wrote his words for the death of the doctor:eek:. Come along Smith:D
Oh! Sorry, misunderstood. Forgot all about SJA for a moment.
Well maybe if I had used capitals:o. Sorry:o.
It's an interesting idea though, I read somewhere that Matt is quite involved in the way he delivers his lines and portrays the doctor, but I couldn't tell you were.
I'll bet he's a bit of a perfectionist like good old Peter Falk.
Now I wonder why you are referring to Peter Falk:D, did you watch the Princess Bride this weekend.:D:D
I think he may be.
Actually I didn't, but somebody once made that remark about his work on Columbo.
[RIMMER] ah yes, the man in the dirty mac who discovered America [/RIMMER]
Writers write. Directors direct. (And yes, I realise that's a bit of a simplification, but you get my point.)
Matt wasn't like that in Moses Jones.
I assume you are telling me off, because I'm confusing writers and directors;).
Or are you telling me that it is all down to Matt's acting style (which I fully agree with, a good actor takes a role and makes it his own and isn't the same person in each role, which I believe Matt to be capable off)?
Actually I don't get your point:p.
So yeah depending on the scene, I am sure that its Matt, at times Moff, at times the director...for example, the Victory scene where he says "I am the Doctor and you are the Daleks"...had more emphesis when the leeked audio was played on the net...but when the episode aired it was slightly more understated (shame really, as i loved the orginal take, though that isn't to say that what we got was rubbish, no it was still great)
Love Matt's quirks...loved Tennant's too..hey I love all of them!!!!:D
Now, now this kind of talk will you have committed to a mental asylum in no time.;).
yes must be careful.....they are all rubbish!!!!! there...:cool::D
Oh lordy, that means I'm going to have to think about what I actually meant and try and explain it. Bugger.
I was picking you up on confusing writers and directors yes. Though in reality it's a combination of interlinked things ... a writer generally can't/won't write the theatrically per se, but the script must contain the seed at least of the finished product that we see. The director realises the vision, and guides the actor to the best performance, but the actor's interpretation brings the character to life. And then, having seen the actor play the role, that affects the writer when he subsequently rights for that same actor playing the same character.
I'm pretty sure that Matt hadn't been cast when Moff wrote the 11th Hour, since I think I remember Matt saying that he read that episode at his audition. So initially at least, Moff wrote for the 11 Doctor, but not specifically for Matt.
I may also have read somewhere that RTD hadn't seen Matt play the Doctor when he wrote Death of the Doctor for SJA, but on the other hand I may have completely invented that - it's late at night as I write this, hence the stream of consciousness rambling.
I think my point is that yes, it is Matt, but it's not Matt in every role he plays. Which is, after all, the sign of a good actor.
(Karen too, if they were to go with a female Doctor, from her lone scenes in the Tardis in the lodger, I think she'd be quite good. Both strike me as a bit mad)
Funny really, I thought the exact opposite in series 5.
Tennant seemed to slip into the role because he was a fan since 6 and blah blah blah blah living the dream blah blah blah and it seemed more effortless for him
Matt's shall we say quirkyness came across to ME as if he was trying too hard to make this character a bit of an oddball rather than doing what comes naturally.
But after his performances in Death of the Doctor and The Christmas special I felt he settled into the role more after a bit of a break, bit of reflection, working out what worked and what didn't and I was a lot more comfortable with his performance in the role.
Please not the personal nature of this post, the giant ME's and everything that denotes it is my personal opinion.
I will not be hounded and taken to task for having one, not again, not now!
Personally, i think his performances in series 2 were incredibly uneven, wasn't really till series 3 he totally nailed the part and made it his own. I think his being a fan was a disadvantage initially actually as he was trying too hard at times.
I agree with DS that Matt slipped in to the role very naturally, I think the first stories he filmed were the weeping angels ones and those were very strong from an acting point of view for Matt.
I (and others) thought Eccleston seemed uncomfortable in the role. Muttley (and others) will strongly disagree, and say he was a natural.
I thought Tennant fit the role like a glove from day one, I didn't notice any unevenness of performance. He is the defining Doctor for me.
Though I liked Matt from the start (who could not?) I did find him a bit OTT at times with his quirky traits. It's not that they jarred, but they were noticeable. Now I don't know if he's toned them down or if I've just got used to them, but they are less noticeable to me.
pause.
He does that! In fact, its one fo his traits I copy when I do impressions. And all his hand movements. And the flopping about. And the running of his hand through his long bit of hair. And his bending of the neck which gives him a hunch back look.
And the list goes on! :rolleyes:
give that man an eye brow.
note: lousy quote from a lousy RD episode to comeback with but needed to show my appreciation somehow.