Home› Doctor Who
Click here to check out Digital Spy's Doctor Who section for the latest breaking news, rumours and updates.
Options

Nu-Who is 10 years old, this year!

tiggerpoohtiggerpooh Posts: 4,182
Forum Member
✭✭✭
in Doctor Who #1
In March, it will be excactly 10 years since we saw Christopher Eccleston in the Tardis with Billie Piper. :D Just wondering if there is anything special planned? Like any merchandise, perhaps? :confused: Or a special programme to profile the last ten years? :confused:

I think there will be something on the BBC News about this, but other than that I am not sure.

Anyone know any more details? :confused:

Comments

  • Options
    CD93CD93 Posts: 13,939
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #2
    Just statements from RTD & Moffat both saying it would be silly to celebrate "the 10th" after "the 50th" so I'm not expecting much :p

    But with Mr. Misdirect in charge, I should never say never. There may well be something to note it. Talking heads and all.
  • Options
    adams66adams66 Posts: 3,945
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #3
    CD93 wrote: »
    Just statements from RTD & Moffat both saying it would be silly to celebrate "the 10th" after "the 50th" so I'm not expecting much :p

    But with Mr. Misdirect in charge, I should never say never. There may well be something to note it. Talking heads and all.

    I doubt we'll get Talking Heads - David Byrne really doesn't get on with his ex bandmates these days...
    Oh.... hang on a minute...
    ;-)
  • Options
    doctor blue boxdoctor blue box Posts: 7,341
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #4
    As someone who grew up in the 90's and never really discovered doctor who until 2005, it seems strange to me to think that there are now 10 year old kids in the world for whom doctor who has always been on their entire lives.

    Then again, older people born from mid 1960's to 80's would have had the same sort of experience, so I suppose it is me and my generation who are the odd one's out in not getting to experience having it on in our childhood.

    Sometimes it feels as though that means I missed out not getting to see it as a kid, but at other times I think that I may not have gotten involved with a show that was already years old, and would likely have been of really bad quality had it still been on then, since it already is said to have been in 89' hence it's cancellation so I often mostly think that I am glad that it was presented to me as a new show in 2005 with the back story gradually drip fed, as I may have missed out on the show altogether.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 557
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #5
    tiggerpooh wrote: »
    I think there will be something on the BBC News about this. :0

    Not even that, I should think. I think it will be noted via some not-so-obscure reference(s) to Eccleston's era. Twelve might glimpse that incarnation, or someone who looks similar. Or an episode featuring the Autons, or the adoption of 'Bad Wolf' as a codename. Something like that.

    What might be nice would be an allegorical episode where part of the plot involves an institution, civilisation or ideal (or, something less grandiose, such as a band), once beloved but now neglected, given a triumphant return, only for it to sore to new heights.
  • Options
    Face Of JackFace Of Jack Posts: 7,181
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #6
    Back in my old days (harrumph!) - Jon Pertwee was celebrating 10 years of Doctor Who with the reunion of The Three Doctors. Jolly romp it was too!! :)
    But nowadays - it is just classed as a continuation of that era. We've had the 50th - and I think that's all we'll get for now! Quite rightly so! :D
  • Options
    TEDRTEDR Posts: 3,413
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #7
    doctor blue box wrote: »
    As someone who grew up in the 90's and never really discovered doctor who until 2005, it seems strange to me to think that there are now 10 year old kids in the world for whom doctor who has always been on their entire lives.

    As someone who grew up in the '80s it upsets me that people who grew up in the '90s are now intelligent independent adults that we meet around town*. Next stop: the grave.

    * "They were younger than us."
    "What?"
    "That couple. They were younger than us."
    "Only physically"
  • Options
    Scorpio2Scorpio2 Posts: 5,632
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #8
    Where did all those years go!? :o

    An Easter special would've been nice for the anniversary. Nothing too big and no past Doctors just an ordinary episode.
  • Options
    Sara_PeplowSara_Peplow Posts: 1,579
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #9
    Should be an ideal opportunity to bring back some characters and baddies we haven't seen for a while. It is also Captain Jacks anniversary too. So he would be top of my list.
  • Options
    MulettMulett Posts: 9,057
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #10
    Sara_Peplow wrote: »
    Should be an ideal opportunity to bring back some characters and baddies we haven't seen for a while. It is also Captain Jacks anniversary too. So he would be top of my list.

    Yes, it could be a low level celebration - Captain Jack, maybe Martha too. It did feel (a little bit) like a wall came down on the first five years of new Who when Steven Moffat took over.

    I understand he wanted a clean slate for his first season (or two) but it would be nice if he started to include or revisit some of the RTD era characters now his era is so established.

    There are sixteen year old fans who's early memories of Who are Doctor 9 and Rose. I think that's lovely and it would be nice to acknowledge that on screen.
  • Options
    johnnysaucepnjohnnysaucepn Posts: 6,775
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #11
    Mulett wrote: »
    I understand he wanted a clean slate for his first season (or two) but it would be nice if he started to include or revisit some of the RTD era characters now his era is so established.
    Surely it was more a case of cast and crew all moving on at the end of an era, rather than being excluded at the beginning of one?
  • Options
    Xmas_TrenzaloreXmas_Trenzalore Posts: 550
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #12
    johnnysaucepn wrote: »
    Surely it was more a case of cast and crew all moving on at the end of an era, rather than being excluded at the beginning of one?
    I think they mean all the Cracks in Time erasing the big events like invasions and earth being teleported away, and the Doctor erasing himself from history business: essentially rebooting the new-who continuity. I personally didn't see the point in any of that. Just make a story, and if you don't want those elements to be a factor, don't.

    EDIT: (Something I posted in the Dalek thread accidentally)

    It would be interesting if they filmed an extra episode in secret. Might explain the 12 episode count.

    Honestly though, just a short episode would do me. Something like Night of the Doctor. A short, interesting event, with a little fan service. Maybe just visiting an old companion or something.
  • Options
    doctor blue boxdoctor blue box Posts: 7,341
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #13
    Mulett wrote: »
    Yes, it could be a low level celebration - Captain Jack, maybe Martha too. It did feel (a little bit) like a wall came down on the first five years of new Who when Steven Moffat took over.

    I understand he wanted a clean slate for his first season (or two) but it would be nice if he started to include or revisit some of the RTD era characters now his era is so established.

    There are sixteen year old fans who's early memories of Who are Doctor 9 and Rose. I think that's lovely and it would be nice to acknowledge that on screen.

    I agree. Would be nice to see some of the old faces again. For this reason Jack would be the perfect choice for a return, being a RTD era character created by Moffat he sort of represents both of them at once. Jack and river just needs to happen at some point.

    Other RTD era faces would be more than welcome too. Rose and Donna can come back any time and for any length of time in my opinion.
  • Options
    MulettMulett Posts: 9,057
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #14
    johnnysaucepn wrote: »
    Surely it was more a case of cast and crew all moving on at the end of an era, rather than being excluded at the beginning of one?

    I think it's safe to say John Barrowman would have been back in a heartbeat.
  • Options
    CD93CD93 Posts: 13,939
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #15
    ...and he probably would have been if it hadn't been for that meddling Miracle Day. :(
  • Options
    JAS84JAS84 Posts: 7,430
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #16
    ^Yeah, how ironic - he couldn't play Jack because he was already playing Jack in another production! What a lack of coordination!
Sign In or Register to comment.