I think since 2005 I have said, that a Classic Who Serial should have been done,

When Tennant only wanted to do the three episodes would have been ideal.
Still think there is no reason it should not be done.
I think it should start with him being a travelling nomad after say, Grace has died or something.

CE seemed very negative towards Rose to begin with.
I never saw in my mind Doctor Grace jumping in a British Police Box, rather McGanns Doctor returning to visit her as she aged.

Maybe losing Grace, going to 'war' gave us the Ecelleston Doctor.l

I voted CE as the series needed a new doctor for a fresh start and it doesn't bother me that CE only did one series, he was a great Doctor.

This is the most evenly matched two choice poll I've ever seen here!

The TV Movie wasn't a failure. It achieved well over 9 million viewers in a none-prime slot (May bank holiday, many people away for the day). It wasn't massively lower than "Rose" which had a lot more PR behind it. Personally I hated the script but it most certainly wasn't a failure in the ratings, not here anyway. But when you co-produce something both sides need to be willing.

Had Eccleston been on-board for more than a single series then I would agree with the decision to start afresh with him. But only one series? Could easily have been a McGann series with the regeneration to Tennant at the end as normal. I doubt it would have impacted the return at all. 9 years had past so as far as the core audience would be concerned it would be a new Doctor anyway.

Voted Christopher. Whilst I absolutely take the point that the TV Movie was a success in Britain (ratings-wise; McGann's great, glad Sylvester got a send-off and the TARDIS interior is beautiful, but imho it's not up to much really story-wise) I think we really needed a brand new Doctor for C21 'Who'.

And I'm saying that on the day I went completely misty-eyed watching 'The Night of the Doctor'. I just hope Paul will return again...can't see why not.

And that's why it was a failure in the long-term. It failed to launch a TV series or further TV movies. Worst of all, it quite possibly kept Doctor Who off TV for several years until the co-production contracts expired.

Not McGann's fault, obviously. He just ended-up as the figurehead for Segal's grand scheme to launch a series via a "backdoor pilot".


Well, one year was the contract term agreed by RTD and CE. With the benefit of hindsight, we can say they should have tied the lead actor to a multi-year contract for this hugely-successful series. In 2004, however, there was a very real fear that the new series might be a massive flop which kills the series for good.

And who's to say McGann would have come back at that time? Spending a few hours recording audio plays is very different from devoting a year of your life to project which might be a massive failure. Particularly when you're already associated with a transatlantic version which went nowhere.

We should be thankful that RTD and the Moff had the good grace to respect the continuity (apart from the "half-human" bit, obviously). The Doctor Who TV Movie could easily have ended-up alongside Knight Rider 2000, Dallas: JR Returns and The Munsters' Revenge as an attempted relaunch which was later overwritten by an actual relaunch.

Having just watched the minisode on the red button rather than a small computer screen, I can appreciate just what a great Doctor McGann would have been for the re-launch..

It's such a pity he was overlooked, and I am so glad I voted McGann in the poll.

It's interesting that this poll is so divided.

I voted Eccleston.

When the new series came about in 3005, d to see McGann back in the role so he could carry on where he let off. But as it was a BB TV production and not a american funded TV movie production, and because it was so long, it probably was the right thing to see a new doctor in the role. Also I am blinkered by the fact I never did see much classic who before the TV movie so the standards by which I was judging the Doctor and his TARDIS were quite high. It took a long time for me to approve of 9 and 10's TARDIS interior.

But the point is, Eccleston made 9 his own and I can't really see McGann pulling off the stories CE had to work with. So in hindsight, I choose Eccleston.

Wow this is an even poll! I vote marginally for Eccleston because as much as part of me thinks McGann should have been the Doctor in the relaunch a bigger part of me thinks that it was right to have a clean break of sorts and Eccleston was right at the time. Returning with McGann in 2005 may have been perceived by the modern audience as an attempt to revive the past rather than relaunch a modern Who and I'm not sure that would have worked. That said I think the prequel shows that there is room in the current Whoniverse for McGann.

I never quite believed McCann's Doctor. He doesn't seem right to me somehow.

I personally would have loved to see the series start again with McGann, but I think they made the right decision for the show.

I hope most people were able to see through the mess I made of my last post.

i know its not befitting for a doctor but if he was on bbc2 or cbbc some sorta series for paul mcgann ,,it would be something and im sure itll get millions of viewers,,id pay my licence fee thrice over

was it done on a phone or tablet or something?

This is a good point, I think a lot of fans may have liked for it to be McGann, for the continuity and because he didn't really get a fair crack of the whip, but honestly the show needed Eccleston - people forget now but until he was cast the media were not really taking the relaunch seriously, even talking about the likes of Paul Daniels being cast. Eccleston gave the project a bit of clout right from the off and that was badly needed.

Also McGann would have had the perceived failure of the TV movie hanging over him (I say perceived because it actually did rather well in the UK even if it had mixed reviews here).

I voted Eccleston because a clean break was necessary for the success of the 2005 series. (And, BTW, it's incorrect to say CE hates Doctor Who.)

I think PM makes a fine Doctor and it would have been great to see more of him as the Doctor. There's no reason he couldn't come back in some future multi-Doctor story.

As it stands, to devote the "prequel" (more correctly called "prologue") to his Doctor is a beautiful gift to long standing fans from the Moff.

I agree about the BBC's egregious misuse of the word "prequel" to describe prologues. In this case, however, The Night of the Doctor is both a prologue to The Day of the Doctor and a legitimate prequel to everything since 2005.

I agree. It's not a prequel to the 50th special itself though because it's not been released or aired yet.

It's definitely a prequel though as it takes place further back in the Doctor's timeline than the current narrative.

Love McGann, underrated as the Doctor in the movie, his stint in the Minisode was just superb. Its a tragedy that he didn't get a chance to play the role on telly and based on what we have seen he would have been superb. However, I think they made the right choice with CE.

So, as the poll does not give option I will just state that Yes I think he should have had the chance but equally, I'm very grateful that Eccleston did it.

Tomayto, tomahto!

McGann's performance in the mini episode was excellent. I'd love to see more of him.

Paul McGann's overall acting record plus his experiences in the 1996 film and the recent minisode all show that he was more than capable of performing as Dr Who. It's a pity that he wasn't given the opportunity to play a full TV series or two but at least he was included in the 50th year of the series via the minisode.

In addition, some Paul McGann Dr Who items are available below:

http://www.bbcshop.com/doctor-who/do...311741&bklist=
http://www.bbcshop.com/paul-mcgann/d...905206&bklist=
http://www.bbcshop.com/doctor-who/do...vd2806&bklist=

PS I didn't vote as the poll as constructed seemed a little unfair to both actors. A McGann doctor followed by an Ecclestone one, etc. would have been fine by me to restart the series.

Nope, I don't even have that excuse.

When I first read that message, the only error I spotted was the year! When I re-read it I wet myself