The War Doctor
Nov. 27th, 2013 12:02 pmI'm guessing that John Hurt's War Doctor was inserted into the timeline because of Christopher Eccleston's refusal to show up for the Anniversary. If Eccleston had been available it seems likely we would have seen him regenerating from Paul McGann, fighting in the Time War and then emerging as the damaged character we encountered in the first season of the revived show. That, anyway, would have been the shortest route from A to B. If such was the original plan then what we have with the War Doctor is an inspired bodge- a repair to the fabric of the story necessitated by events beyond the show runner's control. Making a creative virtue out of necessity has been an especial glory of Dr Who. You lose the services of William Hartnell so you give the Doctor the power to regenerate- and so create a narrative that need never end and which receives a refreshing infusion of the new and unexpected every two or three years.
It would have been nice to see Eccleston again, but one can't regret the invention of the War Doctor or the casting and performance of John Hurt. They have enriched the mythos. Sometimes- and especially with a show like Dr Who that has a history- even an ethic- of improvisation- accidents turn out to be really lucky.
It would have been nice to see Eccleston again, but one can't regret the invention of the War Doctor or the casting and performance of John Hurt. They have enriched the mythos. Sometimes- and especially with a show like Dr Who that has a history- even an ethic- of improvisation- accidents turn out to be really lucky.
no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 01:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 03:04 pm (UTC)I do regret Christopher Ecclestone, who I liked best of the New Doctors - and the scenes with Billie Piper would have worked vety well that way. I'm sure you're right...
no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 03:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 03:49 pm (UTC)I imagine Eccleston said "No" and Moffat went "Right, who's the biggest name we can get?"
I suspect Hurt was a long shot. He doesn't do very much TV. I read an interview with him in which he suggested he wasn't automatically convinced.
no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 03:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 04:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 05:16 pm (UTC)pbs doesn't seem to buy the new ones
thinking finding out what happened to the missing one
would be a good story to go after
I am curious what he's up to
he's more famous by saying no.
no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 06:00 pm (UTC)I read or heard several times Eccleston sat down with Moffat and they'd talked but Eccleston had ultimately refused to appear. But considering how much misinformation Moffat proliferated, I didn't know how much I ought to trust the info. But it looks now to have been true.
I agree it's worked out to the show's advantage--John Hurt's War Doctor has a certain cold weariness Eccleston didn't have. And the contrast with the sort of manic exuberance in Eccleston's early episodes is interesting now. It looks like he's already trying to break away from the man who did what the Doctor ought never do.
no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 06:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 06:42 pm (UTC)It's a shame Eccleston pulled away from Who so early, but it's rather what one expects of him. He has a reputation for being a member of the awkward squad.
no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 06:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 07:32 pm (UTC)"it really wasn't his cup of tea"
is i remember being said about him
when he started.
but once he was snared
he did do a good effort at be the Dr.
its not a easy role
and he does have many other things going
he doesn't need to revisit something
that was contrary to his career path-
but I do think he gain more fans just by being Who too.
there's got to be some controversy
if being a no show is it and nothing worse
that's ok.
no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 08:03 pm (UTC)Maybe. Though he was just recently in Thor: The Dark World. Hard man to analyse.
no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 08:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 09:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 09:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-11-27 09:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-11-28 01:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-11-28 05:46 am (UTC)that never got past playing JC in SC Superstar
it was for them.
being the lead in a kids show
does seem to do that too.
no subject
Date: 2013-11-28 08:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-11-29 07:12 am (UTC)I'm not sure RTD had that in mind at the time, but it does fit with the arc of Rose's re-humanising of the Doctor. (Even with the War Doctor in the timeline, maybe the Eccleston Doctor spent some time mopping up Time War fallout for a while before meeting Rose.)
I also think the War Doctor adds a lot. He's so subdued, but also funny and sweet. I like that he was set up as this menacing figure, but turns out to be approachable and maybe kind of innocent (despite spending so long fighting the Time War - given slow Time Lord aging and how young he is when he first regenerates, it must have been a very long time).
And it would have been nice to see Eccleston Doctor again, but I think it makes sense that it's actually his regeneration which is too raw and menacing to be revisited, and not, it turns out, the War Doctor's.
no subject
Date: 2013-11-29 04:30 pm (UTC)I imagine RTD wanted to start with as clean a slate as possible. The Time War was his way of drawing a line between classic Who and new Who. He was saying "That was then and this is now and there's a cataclysmic event in between." I don't suppose he had any plans to deal with the War itself.
I thought it was a nice touch that McGann regenerated into a young John Hurt and not into Hurt as he is now.