Well, he was a hardly-known jobbing actor. And his performance wasn't really an impersonation of Hartnell.

David Bradley is a distinctive actor in his own right. Not the sort of guy who would just copy someone else. Could you imagine Daniel Craig being instructed to do an impersonation of Sean Connery?


He needed a stick! The guy is 81 now and it will take years to get a film into production.

Besides which, how many aged actors could be the leading man in a genre film, these days? Not many. Maybe Sir Ian McKellan or John Hurt. Possibly Patrick Stewart. But Sylvester McCoy? No, just NO!

Totally illogical. LEGO is much more adaptable than a few seconds of a man running down a corridor.

Also, Eccleston's footage was shot as part of his TV contract with BBC Wales in 2004-2005. If BBC Studios, a different company, wants to build a story around that footage, they would have to seek his permission for its use.

Shoot several sequels including parts of the fourteenth (or later) film before seeing the box office takings for the first one? No, the film industry doesn't work like that.

Can you name one instance where parts of the fourth film (never mind the fourteenth) were filmed before the first one was released? Not including non-chronological series such as Star Wars.

And the award for the dopiest post of the thread goes to....

Well, at least it would have made James Bond a little bit more believable...



How do we not know the stick wasn't simply just a prop to create the image of a stereotypical museum curator?


Tom Baker could be a leading man in a movie in his sleep, Peter Davison is still a household name so would likely be a popular choice with a movie company, Colin Baker would perhaps struggle a little bit but would probably have the gravitas to pull it off and Sylvester McCoy has already appeared in The Hobbit movies anyway so is familiar enough with audiences.

LEGO had absolutely no defined characters (unless you count licensed and videogame characters) before The LEGO Movie. At least that 10 second clip has a defined character.


That wouldn't exactly be hard. It's still the BBC.


I think a lot of people would be shocked if it wasn't a success. A Doctor Who movie would have the potential to rival Star Wars in terms of success.


Nope but let's not forget movies are often shot back-to-back and there's plenty of times in the history of film where new ideas of how to shoot a movie have been attempted. One example being Les Miserables; the first movie musical to do the singing live.

Just this thread?

OK, I'll bite.
I'm curious, genuinely curious, do you actually believe all this stuff that you're writing?

I mean, do you genuinely think that the Bond movies would somehow be more believable if all the actors playing Bond had attempted a Connery impersonation?
Do you genuinely believe that workable, marketable film can be based around a 10 second clip of the Ninth Doctor running away from a fireball?
Really??

Or are you just trying, and succeeding admirably, to wind this forum up?

Given some of the strange things you believe (such as nasty Eccleston's nice doppleganger), that doesn't mean much.

So Tom Baker attended Buckingham Palace playing a stereotypical museum curator? If he was going to make an appearance in-character, I would expect the old hat and scarf would be the standard props.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...am-Palace.html

Name one blockbuster film with Baker, Davison, Baker or McCoy in the lead role?

Which is why The LEGO Movie could be built from scratch.

If you want an example of a movie with the "lead" actor's performance consisting of a few non-speaking moments of stock footage, look at Bela Lugosi in Plan 9 from Outer Space. Didn't that work well?

The permission would need to come from Eccleston himself. Do you think he would be happy to put his name to a Plan 9-style mess?

Cinematic success is far from guaranteed. Particularly if they went with your barmy idea to go with aged actors who are little-known outside the UK.

A commitment for 14+ movies? Jog on!

Plan 9 From Outer Space is a much misunderstood avant garde classic, I'll have you know!

Only a tiny bit more believable. It would only be 100% believable IMO if either they stated 'James Bond 007' is a codename which is why each James Bond looks and acts different or if Sean Connery had always been and still was playing James Bond.


They're making a film on bloody Play-Doh! Of course it's possible.

Just because it hasn't been done doesn't mean it can't. Three out of the four have the ability to pull off being a lead actor in a film IMO.


So could a narrative formed around a 10-second clip of a northern Time Lord from Gallifrey.


Well, they managed to use archive footage of him in Day of the Doctor.

Moffat was careful not to make it appear that Eccleston had shown up to shoot new material for Day of the Doctor. Which is why the regeneration cuts off just as Eccleston's face is becoming clear.

“It was one thing to include [Eccleston] among all the other archive Doctors, as they flew in to save the day -- in fact, it would have been disgraceful to have left anyone out -- but placing him in that [regeneration] scene might have given the impression he’d actually turned up for filming, which would have been crossing the line."
http://www.doctorwhotv.co.uk/moffat-...tion-62935.htm

Also, Eccleston's contract was with BBC Wales. If BBC Films or BBC Studios wanted to use footage, a new contract would have to be negotiated with the actor himself.

Besides which, it's utterly bonkers to think that a movie could be built around a few seconds of non-speaking footage. The only example of that being done with a well-known actor is Bela Lugosi in Plan 9 from Outer Space.

That was a couple of seconds!
You are genuinely suggesting that a whole film could be built around a few seconds of archive film? You really are taking the p..s aren't you?
If you are actually serious I'd suggest having a wee look at how films are actually made so you can appreciate how far from reality your suggestion actually is....

And not how films were made by Ed Wood.

You'd like to call it trolling, wouldn't you? But the sad truth is that not even a troll makes this much effort to string a thread along... this is all just derailing, pathetic stupidity.

I swear I actually lost some brain cells as a result of reading the last page or two.

I'm in tears of laughter from reading this thread. Great work, DB, keep it up.

Maybe the film could be the emotional journey of the fireball, misunderstood to be evil, but which actually happens to be the last of its kind, after the rest of the fireballs were destroyed in the Time War.

Imagine the story arcs they could have in each of the films leading up to this fireball revelation..

Burned Wolf
Torched Wood.
He Will Burn Four Times.

This stuff writes itself, oh why haven't we got a movie already?!

This is now the only potential Doctor Who film I'd ever be interested in.

Look! He was a surrealist auteur who was well before his time! People just don't understand his subversive take on various genres.......honestly.

Hellfire Will Fall..
The Impossible Flame...
The Fireball of The Doctor......

Even his name is false. His real name is hidden.

It burns in the stars, in the fireball of Eccleston himself!

Maybe they could grab the footage of 9 saying "I'm on fire!" from The Doctor Dances and make a sequel based around that too.

The Doctor is a legend woven throughout history. When disaster comes he's there. He brings a fireball in his wake...

So that's why #3 said "great balls of fire!" in The Five Doctors!

They could also reuse footage of Pertwee from The Five Doctors. Have the Doctor driving Bessie down the same corridor. He sees something in his rearview mirror and proclaims "Great ballth of fire!"

Honestly, I didn't see Lewis's post above mine.

Great minds! In DB world, us two thinking similar things proves 100% that there is an audience for this! Market research is complete. Time to make the film.