Just a quick one.... and I have my tin hat on to survive all the bricks that will be thrown at me for asking such a stupid question....

... If we know Rassilon's name, Romana Fuerteventura, Omega, The Valeyard and several other Time Lords, why are we not allowed to know The Doctors's name. What has he got to hide ?

Is his name Kevin ?

D

His real name is Sylvester McCoy. That's why Earth's Sylvester McCoy was hired for the part.

We don't know The Valyards name as it's the same as the Doctors, Valyard is just a title.

He was the best Doctor ever

I expect an apology for daring to suggest otherwise

We'll probably never know the Doctor's real name. The Master's real name is apparently Koschei.

We know you're joking... but newbie posters may think you mean that !!!!!

D

Actually I'm deadly serious. Watch Remembrance of the Daleks, Silver Nemesis, The Curse of Fenric or Survival. Classic episodes with the best assistant the Doctor ever had (Ace) Had Dr Who continued with a decent budget Sylvester would have won over more fans than Tom Baker. The cancellation of Dr Who under the guardianship of Nathan-Turner was a travesty.

They should never reveal that the Doctor's name is Dave btw

His name is Brian...and he's a very naughty boy.

We won't find out till probably the last ever episode of Doctor Who but when we do i think all living doctors and producers should be present and have a say in what the name will be.

According to the "Making of Doctor Who" books (and
implied in "Remembrance"), the Doc's real name is a
mathematical equation.

I always thought the reason the Doctor never revealed
his real name is that it would somehow give his
enemies power over him (a la Rumpelstiltskin and
A Wizard of Earthsea) .

I absolutely do not get the love for Survival. Cat things on horses? Anthony Ainley at his supreme hammiest? Hale and bloody Pace?

Can someone explain it to me, please?

I was joking... I would never intentionally or deliberately seriously criticise another persons favourites... Having said that....I would most definitely take the mickey out of them....

...and I could never go back to watching 'classic' Doctor Who; by todays standards I find it unwatchable, immature and cheaply cobbled together with ham acting and amateur cinematography. The character of The Doctor as an alien would surely be more abstract and incomprehensible (like Ecclestone's, Tennant's or Smith's portrayals) rather than the clownish behaviour of the 80's Doctors...

...But then I am known for extreme fastidiousness...

D

Perhaps the Doctor's name is hidden in the title music...

Although, I'd love it to be Marmaduke Bartholomew.

I'd love it if his name turned out to be Leadworth.

You sum up the appeal brilliantly, I thought Anthony Ainley was great btw

Just part of it's enduring appeal, some of the cheapest episodes were the best written (City Of Death). Nowadays we are spoilt with superior SFX and Deux ex machina storylines where the writer has clearly run out of ideas :yawn:

Didn't the Doctor get called by his name in the classic series, either in The Deadly Assassin or by Drax in The Armageddon Factor?

Don't go bringing the Star Wars prequels into this.... That's the best example I can think of of a productiion team thinking SFX can carry poor story and dialogue.

I would like to see the Cardiff team start to remake some of the original stories... lets see if the fifth Doctor would still wear a decorative vegetable..

D

I think you're overly sensitive. To my mind it is accepted that McCoy was the best Doctor. Or possibly equal best, what with Mr. Smith currently managing a very good showing.

I personally think his name is Damien Oliver Carl Thomas Orson Robert.

His name is Rose!

Its Clive, If i was called Clive I would keep it a secret to.

Theta - It was the Armageddon Factor but it was explained as a nickname he had at the Academy.

I don't think the eighties Doctors as a rule engaged in 'clownish' behaviour (well, McCoy at times, but that's all). But more to the point: ham acting and amateur cinematography? No! Absolutely not! Like much of the drama of the times, Who was effectively theatre on screen rather than scaled down cinema, to begin with, and that influenced how it was made-no, it wasn't as naturalistic as modern TV, but it certainly wasn't inferior to modern TV. You're applying current day attitudes to television made decades ago rather than accepting that the way in which TV is made has changed and accepting both for what they are. That's unfair and dismissive of several generations of talented professionals, I think.

That pretty much sums up my view of 'new' Who. However, I agree that the 80's DW was very poor as well.

Then stop watching...and if you have stopped watching, how do you know your view still holds true? Honestly, what a bitter old dear you seem...no need to put "new" in quotations by the way, it actually is new Who even though you don't like it and have (or maybe have not) stopped watching it for the reasons you borrowed earlier in this thread.